IN
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:
12.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.9681
of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.10706 & 10707
of 2024
M/s.Alamelu
Construction,
No.30,
First floor, 45 feet road,
Vallalar
salai, 5th cross, Venkata nagar,
Puducherry
605 011,
Represented
by its proprietor,
Mr.R.Karunanidhi. ...Petitioner
Vs.
The
Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise,
Division~III,
No.14, Municipal Street,
Azeez
nagar, Puducherry~605 010. ... Respondent
Prayer:
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue
a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records connected with order~in~original
No.09/2023~GST dated 27.09.2023 passed by the respondent and to quash the same
for having been passed in gross violation to the principles of natural justice
and contrary to law.
For
Petitioner : Mr.N.Viswanathan
For Respondent :
Mr.Ramesh Kutty,
Senior Standing Counsel
O
R D E R
1.
An order in original dated 27.09.2023 is assailed only in so far as it pertains
to interest and penalty liability. Proceedings were initiated against the
petitioner by issuing a show cause notice dated 27.02.2023. Even prior thereto,
the petitioner had discharged the GST liability on 31.03.2019, 03.04.2019 and
23.04.2019 through the electronic credit ledger. The impugned order was issued
in these facts and circumstances.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to
the benefit of the proviso to Section 50(1) of the Central Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017 and is, consequently, not liable to pay interest. Because the tax
liability was discharged prior to the issuance of show cause notice, it is also
submitted that the petitioner is not liable to penalty. Learned counsel further
submits that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the appellate
authority by way of statutory appeal.
3.
Mr.Ramesh Kutty, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice for the
respondent. He submits that the petitioner collected taxes in respect of the
outward supply of goods/services but failed to remit tax. He also submits that
the petitioner discharged the liability after the commencement of proceedings
and therefore is not entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Section 50(1).
4.
The impugned order records that the petitioner discharged GST liability on
31.03.2019, 03.04.2019 and 23.04.2019. Therefore, the limited scope of
challenge is with regard to interest and penalty. The order discloses that 100%
penalty was imposed. By taking into account the fact that the petitioner
discharged the GST liability in 2019 and the fact that 100% penalty was
imposed, it is just and appropriate that the petitioner be permitted to present
a statutory appeal. Since the time limit for filing such appeal expired, the
petitioner shall be put on terms.
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on instructions, that the
petitioner is willing to remit a sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs as a condition for being
permitted to present a statutory appeal.
6.
Therefore, W.P.No.9681 of 2024 is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to
present a statutory appeal before the appellate authority subject to the
condition that the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs
fifty thousand only) towards interest liability as agreed to within a period of
three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to
remittance of the amount specified above, if a statutory appeal is presented
within the aforesaid period of three weeks, the appellate authority is directed
to receive and dispose of the same on merits without going into the question of
limitation. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Disclaimer: All the
Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by the
Govt. authority and judgement delivered by the court or the
authority information is strictly for educational purposes and on the
basis of our best understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.
