M/S.Stanex Drugs And Chemicals Private Limited vs. The Additional Commissioner Of State Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order of rejection. The petitioner's counsel brought to the court's notice that the issue was covered by a previous judgment of the same High Court in the case of Sri Siddhi Kalko Bhagavan Stone Crusher v. Assistant Commissioner(ST). In that case, the court had allowed the writ petition, set aside the rejection order, and directed the respondent to entertain the appeal and pass appropriate orders after giving a personal hearing. The Government Pleader for Commercial Tax acknowledged that appeals under Section 107 of the Act are required to be filed in Form GST APL-01 electronically or otherwise as notified, and there was no notification for manual filing. However, he did not dispute that the previous judgment was based on this legal position.
Held
The High Court allowed the writ petition, following its previous order in Sri Siddhi Kalko Bhagavan Stone Crusher v. Assistant Commissioner(ST). The Court held that the rejection order impugned in the present writ petition was to be set aside. The reasoning was that the issue was no longer res integra and was covered by the earlier judgment. The Court directed the respondent-appellate authority to entertain the petitioner's appeal and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the procedure established by law, after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing to the petitioner. The appeal was thus restored to the file of the appellate authority. The ratio decidendi is that substantial justice should be preferred over technical considerations, and when a matter is covered by a precedent, the same principle should be applied.
Key Issues
1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's appeal is sustainable in light of the established procedure for filing appeals under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the issue is squarely covered by the High Court's previous order in Sri Siddhi Kalko Bhagavan Stone Crusher v. Assistant Commissioner(ST), which allowed a similar writ petition and directed the appellate authority to entertain the appeal on merits. The petitioner relied on this precedent. Revenue's contention: The Revenue, through the Government Pleader, submitted that as per Rule 108 of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, appeals under Section 107(1) of the Act are required to be filed in Form GST APL-01, either electronically or as notified by the Commissioner. They stated there was no notification enabling manual filing. However, they acknowledged that a coordinate bench had allowed a similar writ petition based on this legal position.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Rule 108
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No. 2184 OF 2023
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.V.Sesha Sai)
When the matter is taken up, it is brought to the notice of this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue in the present Writ Petition is no longer res intergra and is squarely covered by the order of this court in the case of Sri Siddhi Kalko Bhagavan Stone Crusher v. Assistant Commissioner(ST)
The operative portion of the said order reads as follows:- “having regard to the facts and submissions and as the case of the petitioner requires adjudication on merits and when the substantial justice is pitted against technical considerations, it is always necessary to prefer the ends of justice, we are of the considered view that the request of the petitioner merits consideration. Such course also would help the petitioner in having his cause decided on merits.
1 [2020] 80 GSTR 111 (AP)
2 In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned rejection order is set aside with a direction to the 2nd respondent to entertain the appeal of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with the procedure established by law, however, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.” Sri T.C.D.Sekhar, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax submitted that as per the provisions of Rule 108 of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’) the appeal to the appellant authorities under Section (1) 107 of the Act is required to be filed in Form GST APL-01 along with relevant records either electronically or otherwise as may be notified by the commissioner and in the instant case there is no such notification enabling the aggrieved party to file an appeal manually. There is absolutely no dispute with regard to the said aspect of the matter. In fact, while referring to the above said legal position only, a coordinate Bench of this Court allowed the above referred writ petition with the order referred to supra. Therefore, following the above said order and for the reasons recorded therein, this writ petition is also allowed in 3 terms thereof, setting aside the order of rejection impugned in the present writ petition with a further direction to the 1st respondent-appellate authority to entertain the appeal of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the procedure established by law after giving opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The appeal stands restored to the file of the 1st respondent. No costs. Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed in consequence. ______________________ JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
_________________________________
JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI 01.02.2023 TPS
4
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No. 2184 OF 2023
2023 TPS
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.