M/S Jinendra Enterprises vs. The Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Jinendra Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. The petitioner's grievance was that the delay in obtaining GST registration was due to a default by the respondent department, not by the petitioner. The department had illegally levied and collected late fees from the petitioner, which had to be paid for registration to be granted. The petitioner contended that despite several representations highlighting the delay was caused by a technical glitch attributable to the department, the late fee collected should be refunded or credited.
Held
The Court acknowledged that the petitioner had raised the issue of delayed GST registration due to a technical glitch and the subsequent levy of late fees through several representations to the respondent authorities. However, no specific order had been passed on these representations. Considering that the issue revolved around a technical glitch rather than an interpretation of statutory provisions, the Court was not inclined to keep the matter pending. Instead, the Court directed Respondent No. 3, the State Commissioner (GST), to examine the petitioner's complaint and pass an appropriate decision within six weeks of receiving a copy of the order. The petitioner was advised to pursue other legal remedies if aggrieved by the decision.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund or credit of the late fee paid for GST registration, given that the delay was allegedly caused by a technical glitch attributable to the respondent department? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of fairness and departmental responsibility). Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the delay in registration was solely due to a technical glitch within the respondent department's system. Consequently, the late fee collected was illegal and should be refunded or adjusted. They relied on their repeated representations to the authorities highlighting the departmental fault. Respondents' Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments presented by the respondents. The Court proceeded based on the petitioner's submissions and the representations made to the authorities.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 14/09/2022 This petition has been filed by the petitioner for ventilating his grievance that delay in GST registration of the petitioner assessee is on account of default committed by the respondent department and not by the petitioner. The respondent department has illegally taken late fee from the petitioner and in the circumstances that without payment of late fee it was not possible
(2 of 2) [CW-13433/2022] to get registration, the petitioner had to pay the late fee and thereafter GST registration has been allowed. According to learned counsel for the petitioner despite several representations made to the respondent authority bringing to their notice that delay in registration was not on account of any default on the part of the petitioner but was because of technical glitch for which respondent department alone was responsible, the entire amount of late fee which has been deposited by the petitioner is liable to be refunded/appropriate credit be provided to the petitioner. We find that the issue as stated before this Court by the petitioner has been raised before the respondent authority by giving several letters/representations on which so far no specific order has been passed, at this stage, considering that the issue is raised with regard to late registration due to technical glitch and not based on interpretation of any of the provisions of law, we are not inclined to keep the matter pending but to dispose off the same with the direction to the respondent No.3 to examine the complaint of the petitioner and take appropriate decision on the same within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case the petitioner is still aggrieved and does not get relief as sought in this petition, it will be open for him to take appropriate remedy available in law. The petition is disposed off accordingly. (REKHA BORANA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA), ACJ 8-Jayesh/-
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.