M/S. Ad North East Air Cargo PVT. LTD. And Anr. vs. The Joint Commissioner, W.B. GST, Large Taxpayer Unit Corporate Division And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition should not have been dismissed solely on the ground of belated approach, especially when a significant legal issue concerning the retrospective amendment of Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017, was raised. The Court noted that the appellate authority's order dated 14.09.2020 had not addressed the effect of this retrospective amendment. Relying on precedents from various High Courts which favored the assessee on this issue, the Court found merit in the appellants' contention. The Court decided that the legal issue could and should be examined by the appellate authority. Consequently, the appeal and the writ petition were allowed. The order of the appellate authority dated 14.09.2020 was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the appellate authority for a fresh consideration, with an opportunity for a personal hearing and submission of all materials by the appellants. The Court also noted that due to internal changes, the matter was remitted to the appropriate appellate authority.

Facts

This intra-court appeal was filed by M/s. AD North East Air Cargo Private Limited and another (the appellants) against an order dated 04.12.2023, which dismissed their writ petition. The dismissal was solely on the grounds of the appellants having approached the court belatedly. The appellants' primary contention in the writ petition and the appeal concerns the effect of the retrospective amendment to Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017, introduced by the Finance Act, 2021. The appellants argue that the appellate authority's order dated 14.09.2020 did not consider this retrospective amendment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition was rightly dismissed on the ground of belated approach? (Question of fact and procedure). The appellants argued that a significant legal issue regarding the retrospective amendment of Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017, was raised, which warranted consideration. They relied on decisions from this court and other High Courts supporting their position. The revenue (The Joint Commissioner, West Bengal GST, Large Taxpayer Unit, Corporate Division and Ors.) did not appear to have made specific arguments on this point in the judgment, other than supporting the dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of delay.