M/S Starlon Naturals Private Limited vs. The State Of Bihar

Original PDF →
CWJC/8252/2024HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01047987202416 May 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR,THE CHIEF JUSTICE-4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

M/s Starlon Naturals Private Limited (the petitioner) filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court seeking to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against certain orders before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax (B.G.S.T.) Act. The petitioner was unable to file the appeal due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal, which also prevented them from obtaining a stay on the recovery of the balance tax amount as per Section 112(8) and (9) of the B.G.S.T. Act. The State authorities acknowledged the non-constitution of the Tribunal and issued a notification under Section 172 of the B.G.S.T. Act, stating that the period of limitation for filing an appeal would commence only after the Tribunal's President entered office.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner should be extended the statutory benefit of stay under Section 112(9) of the B.G.S.T. Act, subject to the deposit of a sum equal to 20 percent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute, in addition to any amount already deposited under Section 107(6). The Court reasoned that the petitioner should not suffer due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal by the respondents. The recovery of the balance amount and any steps taken for it were deemed stayed. However, the Court also held that this stay could not be open-ended. The petitioner would be required to file their appeal under Section 112 once the Tribunal is constituted and functional. If the petitioner fails to file the appeal within the period specified after the Tribunal's constitution, the respondents would be at liberty to proceed. The Court also directed the release of any attachment on the petitioner's bank account upon compliance with the deposit requirement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the statutory benefit of stay under Section 112(9) of the B.G.S.T. Act, despite the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, by depositing 20 percent of the remaining tax in dispute? The petitioner argued that they should not be deprived of this benefit due to the respondents' failure to constitute the Tribunal. The State's contention was not explicitly recorded regarding this specific issue, but their acknowledgment of the non-constitution and the issuance of the notification under Section 172 suggest an attempt to address the procedural deadlock. The Court also considered the temporal limitation of such a stay, given the ongoing non-constitution of the Tribunal.

Sections Cited

Section 112, Section 107, Section 172, Section 109

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8252 of 2024 ====================================================== M/s Starlon Naturals Private Limited through its Proprietor Pushkar Singh, Male, aged about 36 years, Son of Pramod Kumar Singh, ward no-15, Masnadpur, Barauni, Urvark Nagar, Begusarai, Bihar- 851115. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commisioner of State Taxes, New Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Joint Commissioner, State Taxes, Begusarai Circle, Begusarai, Bihar. 3. The Additional Commissioner (Appeal), State Taxes, Darbhanga Commisionary, Darbhanga, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (11) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 16-05-2024 The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking multifarious reliefs.

2.

The petitioner essentially is desirous of availing statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned orders before the Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "B.G.S.T. Act").

3.

However, due to non-constitution of the 2/4 Tribunal, the petitioner is deprived of his statutory remedy under Sub-Section (8) and Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act.

4.

Under the circumstances, the petitioner is also prevented from availing the benefit of stay of recovery of balance amount of tax in terms of Section 112 (8) and (9) of the B.G.S.T Act upon deposit of the amounts as contemplated under Sub-section (8) of Section 112. 5. The respondent State authorities have acknowledged the fact of non-constitution of the Tribunal and come out with a notification bearing Order No. 09/2019-State Tax, S. O. 399, dated 11.12.2019 for removal of difficulties, in exercise of powers under Section 172 of the B.G.S.T Act, which provides that period of limitation for the purpose of preferring an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 112 shall start only after the date on which the President, or the State President, as the case may be, of the Tribunal after its constitution under Section 109 of the B.G.S.T Act, enters office.

6.

This Court is, therefore, inclined to dispose of the instant writ petition in the following terms:- 3/4 (i) Subject to deposit of a sum equal to 20 percent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute, if not already deposited, in addition to the amount deposited earlier under Sub- Section (6) of Section 107 of the B.G.S.T. Act, the petitioner must be extended the statutory benefit of stay under Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act. The petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit, due to non- constitution of the Tribunal by State of Bihar & Others in C.W.J.C. No. 15465 of 2022. (ii) The statutory relief of stay, on deposit of the statutory amount, however in the opinion of this Court, cannot be open ended. For balancing the equities, therefore, the Court is of the opinion that since order is being passed due to non-constitution of the Tribunal by the respondent-Authorities, the petitioner would be required to present/file his appeal under Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act, once the Tribunal is constituted and made functional and the President or the State President may enter office. The appeal would be required to be filed observing the statutory requirements after coming into existence of the Tribunal, for facilitating consideration of the appeal. (iii) In case the petitioner chooses not to avail the remedy of appeal by filing any appeal 4/4 under Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act before the Tribunal within the period which may be specified upon constitution of the Tribunal, the respondent- Authorities would be at liberty to proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law. (iv) If the above order is complied with and a sum equivalent to 20 per cent of the remaining amount of the tax in dispute is paid then, if there is any attachment of the bank account of the petitioner pursuant to the demand, the same shall be released. (v) Whatever has been deposited, would be given account in determining the 20 per cent directed to be paid herein.

7.

With the above liberty, observation and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

ranjan/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Harish Kumar, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date Transmission Date NA

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.