M/S Sm Associates vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s S.M. Associates, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), Rohtak, to decide an appeal filed on March 28, 2022. This appeal was against an order dated August 28, 2021, passed by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer (Enf.)-cum-Proper Officer, Sonepat. The appeal was filed on March 08, 2022. During the hearing, the learned State counsel stated that the appeal would be treated as filed under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, and the appellate authority would decide it on merits within three months.

Held

The High Court disposed of the petition based on the statement made by the learned State counsel. The Court acknowledged that the appeal filed by the petitioner would be treated as an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The competent appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal on its merits and pass a final decision within a period of three months from the date of the order. No comments were made on the merits of the case itself. The operative direction was for the respondent-department to pass the order within the stipulated timeframe.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals) should be directed to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner, considering it was filed against an order of the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought a mandamus to compel the appellate authority to decide their appeal, which had been pending. Revenue's contention: The State counsel agreed to treat the appeal as filed under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, and assured that the appellate authority would consider it on merits and pass a final decision within three months.