M/S Mani Printers vs. State Of Bihar

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the reduced pre-deposit of ten per cent of the disputed tax amount, subject to its deposit. The Court reasoned that the petitioner should not be deprived of the statutory benefit due to the non-constitution of the GST Tribunal by the respondents. Consequently, the recovery of the balance amount and any steps taken towards it would be stayed. However, the Court clarified that this stay is not open-ended. The petitioner must file their appeal under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, once the Tribunal is constituted and functional. If the petitioner fails to file the appeal within the period specified upon the Tribunal's constitution, the respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed. The Court also directed the release of any attached bank account of the petitioner upon compliance with the deposit requirement.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Mani Printers, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The case concerns the pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Tribunal. An amendment to Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, reduced the pre-deposit from twenty per cent to ten per cent. However, the GST Tribunals had not yet been constituted. The petitioner sought relief based on previous judgments of this court that allowed deposit of twenty per cent of the disputed amount and stay of recovery until the Tribunal was constituted. The current petition seeks to avail the benefit of the reduced ten per cent pre-deposit and a stay of recovery.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the reduced pre-deposit of ten per cent as per the amendment to Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the corresponding provisions of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, given that the GST Tribunals are not yet constituted? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner contended that they should be allowed to deposit ten per cent of the disputed tax amount and be granted a stay of recovery, similar to previous orders granted by the court based on the judgment in SAJ Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Bihar & Others, until the Tribunal is constituted and functional. They argued that the non-constitution of the Tribunal by the respondents should not deprive them of this statutory benefit. Revenue's argument: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent revenue authorities.