Gemar Lollen And Anr. vs. The State Of Ap And 3 Ors.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioners to file a fresh representation under Section 80 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to the appropriate authority, namely, the Commissioner Tax, Excise & Narcotics Department, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. The Court noted that the petitioners had not demonstrated filing any representation to the Commissioner, but rather to the Superintendent. The Court directed that upon filing such an application by the petitioners, the Commissioner should examine the representation on its own merits and consider the applicability of Section 80 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in the given facts and circumstances. The Court did not decide on the validity of the notice or the entitlement to installments, leaving these to be examined by the Commissioner.

Facts

The petitioners, Gemar Lollen and M/s M. L. Enterprise, challenged a notice dated September 12, 2022, issued by the Superintendent of Tax, Excise & Narcotics, West Siang District, Aalo. The notice demanded payment of interest amounting to Rs. 20,09,046/- under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act within 30 days. The petitioners sought to set aside this notice and requested permission to pay the interest in installments as per Section 80 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. They had previously submitted representations to the Superintendent of Tax, Excise & Narcotics, West Siang District, Aalo, dated August 9, 2022, and a forwarding letter dated August 10, 2022, from the Superintendent. The petitioners contended that the Commissioner, Tax, Excise & Narcotics Department, is empowered to allow installment payments under Section 80.

Key Issues

1. Whether the notice dated September 12, 2022, issued by the Superintendent of Tax, Excise & Narcotics, demanding payment of Rs. 20,09,046/- as interest under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, is liable to be set aside? 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to pay the aforementioned interest in installments under Section 80 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that the interest demand notice should be set aside and that they should be allowed to pay the interest in installments as provided under Section 80 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. They contended that the Commissioner, Tax, Excise & Narcotics Department, is the appropriate authority to grant such installment payments. They also referred to their prior representations made to the Superintendent of Tax, Excise & Narcotics, West Siang District, Aalo, and the forwarding letter from the Superintendent. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (State of AP and its authorities).