Sree Sai Sanjana Fruit Products vs. Superintendent Of Central Tax
Held
The Court noted that the learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a comprehensive writ petition. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. There were no orders as to costs. As a sequel, any pending miscellaneous applications were closed. The Court did not decide on the merits of the issues raised regarding the legality of the order or the entitlement to waiver of penalty and interest.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sree Sai Sanjana Fruit Products, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax Appeals (Respondent No. 2) in Appeal No. 39/2023(T) dated February 28, 2024. This order pertained to the tax period April 2018 to August 2019 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner sought to declare the impugned order illegal and contrary to Section 74(1) of the GST Act, and also sought a declaration that they are entitled to a waiver of penalty and interest under Section 128-A of the CGST Act. The petitioner also filed an interim application seeking a stay of recovery of the disputed penalty of Rs. 28,64,799/-. Subsequently, the respondents (Superintendent and Additional Commissioner of Central Tax) filed an application to vacate the interim order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax Appeals dated February 28, 2024, is illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, and contrary to Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a waiver of penalty and interest under Section 128-A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was illegal and contrary to Section 74(1) of the GST Act. They also contended that they are entitled to a waiver of penalty and interest under the newly inserted Section 128-A of the CGST Act. They sought a stay of recovery of the disputed penalty of Rs. 28,64,799/-. Respondents' Contentions: The respondents filed an application to vacate the interim order previously granted to the petitioner.
Sections Cited
Section 74(1), Section 128-A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
APHC010446992024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Bf WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22971 OF 2024 Between: M/s. Sree Sai Sanjana Fruit Products, rep. by its Managing Partner, Sri A. Dhanunjaya Naidu Sy.No.734,740 and 741, i Thavanampalli Mandal Chttoor District-517131 Main Street Mutharapalli Village , Andhra Pradesh. ...Petitioner AND 1. Superintendent of Central Tax, Chittoor Range-1
Additional Commissioner of Central Tax Road, Guntur.
Union of India CGST Range, Chittoor. Appeals, D.No.3-30-15, Ring rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, 3^^^ Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001. / ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or 0^ the 2""' Respondent in Appeal No.39/2023(T) GST, dated 28.2.2024 Central Goods for the tax period April 2018 to August 2019 und
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.