M/S World Trade Park LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the issue involved in the present petition is covered by a previous decision of a Division Bench of the same Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4740/2024. Following the precedent set in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024, the Court disposed of the present petition. The operative direction is that the petitioner shall deposit the amount as per the provisions of Section 112(8) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, within three months from the date of the order. This deposit will prevent further recovery proceedings for the balance amount, provided the petitioner avails the statutory remedy of appeal within a period of three months from the date of the constitution of the Tribunal. The reasoning is based on providing a procedural safeguard to the petitioner due to the non-functional status of the appellate tribunal, allowing them to preserve their right to appeal.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s World Trade Park Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. The core issue revolved around the inability to file an appeal against an order of the First Appellate Court due to the non-functional status of the GST Tribunal. The petitioner argued that the absence of a functional Tribunal prevented them from availing the statutory remedy of appeal. The respondents, including the Union of India and the State of Rajasthan, acknowledged the non-constitution of the Tribunal and referred to previous orders passed by the High Court in similar circumstances, where directions were issued to address this procedural impediment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner can file an appeal against the order of the First Appellate Court when the GST Tribunal is not functional, and if not, what is the appropriate procedural recourse? (Question of law and procedure) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the non-constitution of the Tribunal renders the statutory appeal mechanism unavailable, thus preventing them from pursuing their legal remedy. They sought a way to address this procedural deadlock. Respondents' contention: The respondents acknowledged the non-constitution of the Tribunal. They referred to previous High Court orders in similar matters, suggesting a precedent for handling such situations. They relied on the directions issued in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024, which provided a mechanism for petitioners to deposit a portion of the disputed amount and preserve their right to appeal once the Tribunal becomes functional. They also referred to a circular dated 23.03.2020 issued by the Government of Rajasthan Finance Department (Tax Division).