Union Of INDIA vs. State Tax Department Th Its Commissioner

WP(C)/2788/2024HC Jammu and Kashmir and LadakhGSTCNR JKHC01006101202403 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL1 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Held

The Court held that the order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Technical) was grossly perfunctory. The reasoning was that the said order failed to provide any decision, reasoning, or finding regarding the appeal filed by the petitioner, particularly concerning the application for condonation of delay. Instead, it merely reproduced Rule 107 of the GST Act. The ratio decidendi is that statutory authorities must pass reasoned and speaking orders, addressing the specific issues before them, rather than issuing perfunctory orders that fail to adjudicate the matter. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order and remanded the appeal back to the Assistant Commissioner (Technical) to pass a reasoned order on the application for condonation of delay.

Facts

The petitioner, Union of India, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Technical), State Taxes, Jammu and Kashmir. The petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal before this authority. The impugned order, however, merely reproduced Rule 107 of the GST Act concerning appeals to the Appellate Authority. It failed to provide any decision on whether the appeal was dismissed for being filed beyond the limitation period, offering no reasoning or findings. The Court reviewed this order at the request of both parties.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Technical) is legally sustainable, considering it fails to provide any reasoning or decision on the appeal filed by the petitioner. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was grossly perfunctory as it did not address the merits of the appeal or the application for condonation of delay, instead merely reproducing a statutory rule. They contended that the authority failed to exercise its quasi-judicial function. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondent (State Tax Department).

Sections Cited

Rule 107

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Sr. No.25 SupplementaryList I IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM 7591/2024 In WP(C) 2788/2024 Union of India …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Viqas Malik, Advocate (through V.C) with Ms. Areeba Ahad, Advocate Vs. State Tax Department Th. Its Commissioner ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Ilyas Laway, GA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE

O R D E R 03.12.2024

On request of learned counsel appearing for both the sides, this Court has gone through the impugned order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Technical), State Taxes, Jammu and Kashmir, before whom the statutory appeal was preferred by the petitioner. The said Authority, by way of the impugned order has only reproduced Rule 107 of the GST Act pertaining to appeals to Appellate Authority, but has not given any decision whether the appeal is dismissed for not being filed within limitation. It does not give any reasoning neither does it give any finding. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.