Welspun Aunta Simaria Project PVT. LTD. vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, Welspun Aunta Simaria Project Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging an order dated July 28, 2021, passed by the Additional Commissioner, State Taxes (Appeal), Darbhanga Division, and a subsequent order in Form GST APL-02 dated July 29, 2021. The petitioner had failed to file the certified copy of the impugned order along with its appeal. The State of Bihar and the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Begusarai, were the respondents. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including the quashing of the appellate order and restoration of the appeal.

Held

The Court allowed Prayer (B) of the petitioner, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated July 28, 2021, and the order in Form GST APL-02 dated July 29, 2021. The Court reasoned that the Appellate Authority ought to have been more indulgent regarding the non-filing of the certified copy of the impugned order, particularly in view of the Covid-19 pandemic. The appeal was restored to its original file, number, and status. The petitioner was directed to file the certified copy of the impugned order afresh on November 15, 2021, before the Appellate Authority. The revenue's counsel undertook that the issue of limitation would not be a bar to the appeal being heard on merits if the certified copy is filed. The Court clarified that the pre-deposit requirement for filing the appeal must be complied with, without prejudice to the parties' rights and subject to the Appellate Authority's final order. Any excess deposit was to be refunded within two months of the order. The Court also directed the de-freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts. The Appellate Authority was directed to decide the appeal on merits after affording natural justice and adequate opportunity to all parties, passing a speaking order, and without coercive steps during the pendency of the appeal. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all issues were left open. Proceedings were to be conducted through digital mode if possible.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority ought to have been indulgent regarding the petitioner's failure to file the certified copy of the impugned order along with the appeal, considering the ongoing Covid-19 Pandemic? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the Appellate Authority should have been lenient in accepting the appeal without the certified copy of the impugned order, especially in light of the prevailing Covid-19 pandemic. They also stated that the pre-deposit amount required for filing the appeal had already been deposited. Revenue's Argument: The revenue, through learned Standing Counsel No. 11, stated that if the certified copy of the order is placed on record, the issue of limitation would not hinder the Appellate Authority from hearing and deciding the appeal on merits. They also emphasized that the petitioner is duty-bound to comply with the pre-deposit condition for filing the appeal.