M/S. Uvaraj Industries vs. The State Tax Officer

In these Writ Petitions, the petitioner has challenged the following impugned recovery Notices dated 24.07.2023 issued by the respondent:- Sl. No W.P.(MD) No. Ref. No. of the impugned Notice Assessment Year 1 19506/2023 Pa.Sa.No.33AACFU2202N1ZE/2017-2018 2017-2018 2 19507/2023 Pa.Sa.No.33AACFU2202N1ZE/2019-2020 2019-2020 3 19508/2023 Pa.Sa.No.33AACFU2202N1ZE/2018-2019 2018-2019

It appears that the petitioner had suffered the following adverse Orders-in-Original in the hands of the Original Authority:- _____________ Page No. 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Against the above said orders, the petitioner preferred appeals before the Appellate Authority which were dismissed vide the following orders:- Sl. No W.P.(MD) No. Reference No. of the Order-in-Appeal Date of the Order-in-Appeal Assessment Year 1 19506/2023 AP/GST/149/2022 05.07.2023 2017-2018 2 19507/2023 AP/GST/148/2022 05.07.2023 2019-2020 3 19508/2023 AP/GST/150/2022 05.07.2023 2018-2019

Consequently, the impugned recovery Notices were issued by the respondent seeking to recover the amount confirmed vide Orders-in- Original as affirmed by the Orders-in-Appeal of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST), Trichy. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court as no GST Tribunal has been constituted. Though the GST Tribunal has recently been notified, it is yet to come into force. _____________ Page No. 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The petitioner would have been required to deposit 20% under Section 112 of the GST Act over and above the amount that was paid by the petitioner at the stage of appeal before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of the GST Act.

According to the petitioner, the petitioner has deposited more than 20% of the disputed tax as is contemplated under Section 112 of the Union of India and others, [2023] 111 GSTR 218 (Bom.) : 2023 [73] G.S.T.L. 528, wherein, the Court has held as under:- “10. The Chairman of the Board, in the affidavit, has indicated that no hardship would be caused to the taxpayers because of the non- constitution of the Tribunal. Reading the affidavit along with Circular, it is clear that the Government does not intend that taxpayers are prejudiced for want of the Tribunal. With that intent, the period of limitation has been extended. As a corollary of the intention expressed in the affidavit and the Circular, it follows that the appealable orders (to the Tribunal) would not be implemented till the Tribunal becomes functional. That being the _____________ Page No. 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

It would be advisable, to avoid further complications, that the Respondent-Board issues instructions to incorporate Clause 4.2 of the Circular dated 18 March 2020 in each order which is appealable to the Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 109 of the Act. This would guide the aggrieved parties as to the future course of conduct and reduce needless litigation in the form of filing writ petitions such as the present ones. The Learned ASG states that this option would be considered.

Therefore, we dispose of the Petitions as follows. a) The period of filing the Appeal will stand extended as indicated in Clause 4.2 of the Circular dated 18 March 2020. b) The impugned order will not be given effect until two weeks after the period prescribed for filing an appeal as under Clause 4.2 of the Circular dated 18 March 2020 is over.

All contentions of the parties are kept open, including a challenge to the validity of the provisions, if any.”

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. _____________ Page No. 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Considering the fact that the petitioner has deposited more than 20% of the disputed tax, the impugned recovery Notices issued to the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance subject to the condition that the petitioner either files appeals before the GST Tribunal in case GST Tribunal is constituted, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order or in the alternative, the petitioner files Writ Petitions challenging the respective Orders-in-Appeals and/or Orders-in- Original, within such time.

In which case, the impugned Notice seeking to recover the amount shall stand stayed pending further orders in the Appeals before the GST Tribunal or in the Writ Petitions, as the case may be.

Accordingly, these Writ Petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

2024 Index: Yes/ No Neutral Citation: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order SMN2 / JEN _____________ Page No. 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis