Mandavalli Venkateswara Rao vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the writ petition should be allowed. The reasoning was based on the fact that the GST Appellate Tribunal, as contemplated under Section 112 of the CGST Act, has not yet been constituted. This situation leaves the petitioner without a readily available forum for further legal recourse. The Court found the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana in W.P.No.27071 of 2022 to be directly applicable. Following that precedent, the Court decided that it would be just and proper to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The matter was remitted back to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration of the appeal on its merits, after hearing both parties. This relief was granted on the condition that the petitioner deposits 10% of the disputed tax, in addition to any amount already deposited, within three weeks.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the 2nd respondent (Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)) and a prior order by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner was assessed to tax and penalty under Section 74(1) of the APGST/CGST Act for ₹41,76,972/-. The petitioner's appeal against this assessment was rejected by the 2nd respondent on the technical ground that it was filed beyond the condonable period, specifically with a delay of 69 days. The petitioner argued that since the GST Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted under Section 112 of the APGST Act, 2017, they are left without a remedy and will suffer hardship if the delay is not condoned.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the 2nd respondent should be condoned, considering the non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 of the APGST Act, 2017, and the potential hardship to the petitioner? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal prevents them from pursuing further legal remedies. They argued that in similar circumstances, a Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana had allowed a writ petition and remitted the matter for reconsideration. They sought condonation of delay and an opportunity to pursue their appeal to avoid hardship. Revenue's arguments: The learned Government Pleader, while opposing the writ petition, submitted that if the Court were inclined to allow the petition, suitable terms might be imposed.