M/S. Stanship Logistics PVT. LTD. vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax (Appeal) And Ors

Held

The Court held that Respondent No. 1 was not justified in refusing to take the Petitioner's appeal on record. The Order-in-Original was passed against the Petitioner, making them an aggrieved person entitled to file an appeal. The fact that the payment of Rs. 20,18,308/- was made by M/s. Blue Star Ltd. for the release of goods, and subsequently deducted from the Petitioner's account, meant that the payment was made for and on behalf of the Petitioner. The Court found no provision in the Act that would prevent a person against whom an order is passed, but whose tax and penalty have been paid by another party on their behalf, from filing an appeal. The Petitioner is an aggrieved person and is entitled to file an appeal. The Court directed that the noting by Respondent No. 1 on the covering letter be quashed, the Petitioner should lodge the appeal manually within four weeks, and Respondent No. 1 should take the appeal on record and adjudicate it on merits without raising any objection as to limitation, as the Petitioner had been pursuing the matter bonafidely before the Court. The appeal is to be adjudicated expeditiously.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s. Stanship Logistics Pvt. Ltd., a transporter, was involved in the transportation of imported Split Air Conditioners for its customer, M/s. Blue Star Ltd. An E-way bill was generated, but it was updated due to a vehicle breakdown. Subsequently, the truck was intercepted by Respondent No. 2, who detained the goods, citing the E-way bill's expired validity. An Order-in-Original was passed against the Petitioner, demanding Rs. 10,09,154/- as IGST and an equal penalty under Section 129 of the CGST Act. M/s. Blue Star Ltd. deposited the total amount of Rs. 20,18,308/- to secure the release of goods, which was later deducted from the Petitioner's account. The Petitioner attempted to file an appeal with Respondent No. 1, but it was refused on the grounds that the Petitioner, as a transporter, could not file an appeal when the payment was made by the owner of the goods.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner, as a transporter against whom an Order-in-Original under Section 129(1) of the CGST Act was passed, is an aggrieved person entitled to file an appeal, even if the tax and penalty were deposited by the owner of the goods on their behalf? Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the Order-in-Original was passed against them, imposing tax and penalty. Although M/s. Blue Star Ltd. made the payment for the release of goods, this amount was deducted from the Petitioner's account. Therefore, the Petitioner is the aggrieved party and has the right to file an appeal. They contended that there is no provision in the Act mandating that an appeal must be filed by the person who physically deposited the tax and penalty, especially when the deposit was made on behalf of the person against whom the order was passed. Respondents' Contention: The Respondents supported the decision of Respondent No. 1 to refuse the appeal. However, they could not point to any specific provision in the Act that disentitles a person, against whom an Order-in-Original is passed, from filing an appeal if the tax and penalty were deposited by another party on their behalf.