Dr. Vishwanath Karad Mit World Peace University vs. The State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And Ors

Facts

The Petitioner, Dr. Vishwanath Karad MIT World Peace University, filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated April 8, 2024, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax. The Petitioner sought to set aside this order. During the proceedings, the Court noted that the Petitioner had an alternate statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Petitioner's counsel, on instructions, agreed to avail this remedy but requested the Court to direct the Appellate Authority to entertain the appeal, as the time limit for filing had expired. Additionally, the Petitioner sought a stay on a letter dated February 27, 2025, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax to Axis Bank, directing the bank to pay Rs. 8,63,18,102/- to the GST authorities, considering the Petitioner's intention to file an appeal and deposit the statutory pre-deposit amount.

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court directed that the Petitioner shall file the Appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of 4 weeks from the date of the order. If filed within this period, the Appellate Authority shall entertain the Appeal without raising the issue of limitation. The Court clarified that the Petitioner must comply with the pre-deposit requirement as envisaged under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, before the Appeal is entertained. Furthermore, the Court stayed the operation and implementation of the letter dated February 27, 2025, directing Axis Bank to pay the sum to the GST authorities, given that the Petitioner was availing the alternate statutory remedy. The Court also stipulated that if the Appeal is not filed within the stipulated period, the stay on the letter shall stand vacated, and GST Authorities would be free to proceed against the Petitioner. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner should be permitted to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, beyond the prescribed limitation period, and if so, whether this Court should direct the Appellate Authority to entertain it. The Petitioner argued that the time to file the appeal had expired and requested the Court to direct the Appellate Authority to entertain the appeal if filed within four weeks. The Petitioner also argued that a letter dated February 27, 2025, directing Axis Bank to pay a substantial sum to GST authorities should be stayed, considering the Petitioner's imminent filing of an appeal and the requirement to deposit only 10% of the demanded tax (excluding penalty and interest). The Revenue/State did not record any specific arguments against these requests, as the Court proceeded to hear both sides and pass orders.