M/S Technoculture Resorts And Business Centre Private Limited vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Technoculture Resorts and Business Centre Private Limited, is challenging an order passed on December 22, 2020. The petitioner's primary contention is that the Assessing Officer failed to consider an objection filed by them. However, the assessment order itself states that no objection was on record. The petitioner claims an objection was filed as per Annexure-5, but the Court noted that this document was unsigned and lacked acknowledgment from the Assessing Officer. The Court also observed that the writ petition was filed in 2023, more than three years after the impugned order.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's claim of a filed objection was unsubstantiated, as Annexure-5 was unsigned and lacked acknowledgment. Even assuming an objection was filed, the Court found that the petitioner's proper recourse was to file an appeal before the first appellate authority under Section 107 of the Bihar General Goods and Services Tax Act. The Court emphasized that the statutory period for filing an appeal, including a further period for condonation of delay, cannot be extended by the appellate authority, tribunal, or the High Court. Given that the writ petition was filed over three years after the order, the Court found no reason to entertain it and dismissed the petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Assessing Officer failed to consider the objection filed by the petitioner, as per Section 73 of the CGST Act (or equivalent Bihar GST Act provision), when passing the assessment order dated December 22, 2020? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that an objection was indeed filed (Annexure-5) and that the Assessing Officer erred by not considering it. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the assessment order clearly indicated no objection was on record. Furthermore, even if an objection had been filed, the petitioner's remedy lay with the first appellate authority under Section 107 of the Bihar General Goods and Services Tax Act, and the writ petition was filed after an inordinate delay.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 5 12-07-2023 The petitioner is aggrieved with the order passed on 22.12.2020 produced as Annexure-6. The only contention raised is that when the objection was in place the Assessing Officer has not considered the said objection. In fact, the assessment order clearly indicates that there is no objection in place. The petitioner contends that in fact, an objection was filed as per Annexure-5. We have looked at Annexure -5 which is not even signed. There is no acknowledgment of such objection by the Patna High Court CWJC No.1863 of 2023(5) dt.12-07-2023 2/2 Assessing Officer also. In any event, even assuming that there was an objection in place the petitioner ought to have taken up the issue before the first appellate authority, under section 107 of the Bihar General Goods and Services Tax Act. Three months is provided for filing an appeal and then a further time of one month is also provided for filing an appeal with delay. It is trite that the first appellate authority or the tribunal or even this Court cannot condone the delay beyond the period provided for filing a delayed appeal. It has also to be noticed that the writ petition was filed after three years of the order, in the year 2023. We find absolutely no reason to entertain the writ petition and the same stands dismissed.
Bibhash/Saurabh (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) U
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.