M/S Skylark Infra Engineering PVT. LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that considering the determination of factual aspects is required before delving into the vires of the provisions, the petition should be disposed of by relegating the petitioner to the remedy of appeal before the GST Tribunal. The issue of challenging the vires of Section 19(1) of the IGST Act and Section 77(1) of the CGST and RGST Act, 2017, was expressly kept open. The Court directed that no further recovery proceedings for the balance amount would be taken against the petitioner if the authorities were satisfied that the condition of pre-deposit for filing the appeal had been complied with. The petitioner was also directed to deposit the refunded amount received on these transactions under IGST. Since the GST Tribunal had not been constituted, the petitioner was granted three months from its constitution date to file the appeal, and the Tribunal was directed to consider the appeal on merits after being satisfied with the pre-deposit compliance.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Skylark Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., filed writ petitions challenging an order dated 23.09.2022 passed by the Appellate Authority, State Tax, Jaipur, which rejected their appeal for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner had treated certain supplies as inter-state, liable to IGST, while the respondent No. 3 classified them as intra-state, levying CGST and SGST. The petitioner's grievance was that they had already deposited tax under the IGST Act. The petitions also challenged the vires of Section 19(1) of the IGST Act and Section 77(1) of the CGST and RGST Act, 2017. An interim order directed the petitioner to deposit 65% of CGST and RGST, subject to refund of IGST. The petitioner stated that the IGST refund received had been deposited with GST authorities, and other amounts were also deposited, fulfilling pre-deposit conditions for appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has complied with the pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal before the GST Tribunal, considering the deposit of IGST and subsequent refund and re-deposit. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 129 of the CGST Act and relevant rules regarding pre-deposit for appeals). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that by depositing the IGST amount and subsequently depositing the refund received from the Union of India with the GST authorities, along with other deposited amounts, the prerequisite for pre-deposit for filing an appeal before the Tribunal stands satisfied. Respondents' contention: The respondents' arguments are not explicitly recorded in the judgment regarding the pre-deposit compliance. However, the court's direction to deposit the refunded amount suggests a concern about the full compliance of pre-deposit obligations.