M/S Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs. Commissioner, CGST
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, is challenging orders dated 10.11.2021 and 14.07.2022 passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The petitioner had received a show-cause notice on 19.04.2018 for Service Tax on compensation for accidental claims, leading to an order dated 17.01.2019 demanding Rs.39,90,66,753/-. An earlier writ petition resulted in a direction for the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits. However, the petitioner's appeal was dismissed on 14.02.2020 for non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition. Subsequent writ petitions and a review application were also dismissed. The petitioner then filed an application for restoration of the appeal on 10.11.2021, stating pre-deposit had been made, which was dismissed. A rectification application filed on 14.07.2022 was also dismissed, leading to the present petition.
Held
The Court held that the impugned orders dated 10.11.2021 and 14.07.2022 passed by the Tribunal are set aside. The reasoning is that the pre-deposit condition has now been complied with by the petitioner, and connected matters related to other years are still pending before the Tribunal. The Court found merit in the petitioner's submission regarding the delay being due to communication gaps and wrong advice, especially considering the substantial amount involved. The ratio decidendi is that where a statutory pre-deposit condition, which was the sole reason for dismissal of an appeal, has been subsequently complied with, and related matters are pending, the appellate tribunal should consider the appeal on merits to ensure substantial justice, provided the appellant undertakes to rectify any procedural defects promptly. The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for decision on merits, subject to the petitioner removing any defects in the appeal within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing the petitioner's application for restoration of appeal and rectification, despite the petitioner now claiming compliance with the pre-deposit condition and citing communication gaps and wrong advice as reasons for the delay? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner, a Corporation, experienced delays in complying with the pre-deposit condition due to communication gaps and incorrect advice. They assert that the pre-deposit has now been made and that connected appeals for other years are pending before the Tribunal. They undertake to rectify any defects in their appeal within four weeks of receiving the court's order. Respondent's arguments: The respondent defends the impugned orders, contending that the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunities and that the delays were intentional.
Sections Cited
Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 12/07/2024 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):-
This petition is filed aggrieved of the orders dated 10.11.2021 and 14.07.2022 passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’) dismissing the application for restoration of appeal and rectification.
Brief facts are that the petitioner-Corporation was issued a show-cause notice dated 19.04.2018 by the Service Tax Authorities for levying Service Tax on the compensation received to compensate the accidental claims of the passengers. The show- cause notice culminated in order dated 17.01.2019, creating a demand of Rs.39,90,66,753/- including penalty.
[2024:RJ-JP:29233-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-16269/2023]
Aggrieved of the order, the petitioner filed writ petition. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 23.07.2019 passed in D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.603/2019 (Rajasthan State dismissed on 14.02.2020 for non-compliance of pre-deposit condition. D.B.Civil Writ Petition No.9877/2020 (M/s. India & Ors.) filed by the petitioner against dismissal of the appeal was dismissed on 21.01.2021, considering that compliance of pre-deposit condition was not made. The review filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 18.02.2021. The petitioner filed an application before the Tribunal on 10.11.2021 for restoration of the appeal, stating therein that the pre-deposit has been made. The application was dismissed on 10.11.2021. Application for rectification filed on 14.07.2022 for rectifing order dated 10.11.2021 was dismissed. Hence, the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Corporation and due of communication gap and wrong advise, there was delay in compliance of the pre-deposit condition. It is further argued that the connected appeals related to other years are pending before the Tribunal. The prayer is that the condition of pre-deposit has been made and the petitioner undertakes to remove defects, if any in the appeal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
[2024:RJ-JP:29233-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-16269/2023]
Learned counsel for the respondent defends the impugned order, submits that the petitioner was granted sufficient opportunities, yet the matter was intentionally delayed.
Considering that the pre-deposit condition has now been complied with and connected matters are sub-judiced before the Tribunal, the impugned orders dated 10.11.2021 and 14.07.2022 are set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for decision on merits, subject to the petitioner removing defects, if any, in appeal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
The petition is disposed of accordingly. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Monika/Aarzoo/63 Whether Reportable: Yes
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.