M/S. Suraksha Security And Maintanance Service vs. Additional Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Suraksha Security and Maintenance Service, challenged an Order-in-Original dated April 28, 2021, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate. This order confirmed a demand of Rs. 78,93,478.00 for the period October 2014 to June 2017, along with an equivalent penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, and interest. The petitioner sought to set aside this order as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought a stay on further proceedings, including the collection of the disputed tax and penalty, pending the disposal of the writ petition. The petitioner contended that due to business closure and the COVID-19 pandemic, they could not afford the pre-deposit required for filing an appeal.
Held
The Court held that the impugned Order-in-Original dated April 28, 2021, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, is an appealable order under Section 85(3) of the Finance Act, 1994, before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Court declined to waive the pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal, stating that acceding to such a request would amount to rewriting the statute. The Court reasoned that the statutory mechanism for appeal, which includes a pre-deposit, is a clear provision that cannot be circumvented by the High Court in its writ jurisdiction on the grounds presented by the petitioner. Therefore, the Court relegated the petitioner to the appellate forum provided under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. The writ petition was dismissed on this basis.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned Order-in-Original No. 02/2021-22-Adin (ADC) ST-HYD-GST, dated 28-04-2021, imposing service tax and penalty for the period October 2014 to June 2017, is illegal and arbitrary, warranting intervention by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the Order-in-Original is appealable under Section 85(3) of the Finance Act, 1994. However, due to business closure and the intervening COVID-19 pandemic, they were unable to pay the pre-deposit required for filing an appeal, and therefore, sought a waiver of this requirement. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the revenue side regarding the merits of the Order-in-Original. However, the court's decision implies that the revenue's position, as represented by the Additional Commissioner, was that the order was valid and appealable.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 78, Section 85(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) FRIDAY,THE TWENry EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 35621 OF 2022 [ 32e5 ] its e Between: AND 1 M/s. Suraksha Security and Maintanance Service, represented by Proprietor Shri Shankar Lunavath @ Shankar Naik, Slo. Lunavath Surya, a 46 years, 1-10-21718, Ashooknagar X Roads, Ashooknagar, Hyderaba 500020. s d ...PETITIONER Additional Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500004. 2. The Union of lndia, represented by its Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 1 10001. 3. State Bank of India, represented by its Reginal Manager, Region - lV, Administrative Office -ll, Patny Center, Secunderabad - 500003. 4. State Bank of lndia, represented by its Reginal Manager, Region - V, Administrative Office, Patny Center, Secunderabad - 500003. 5. M/s. Radhasham Tapadia Diagnostice Services, represented by its Managing Director, 1-7-10721A, Opp. Sapthagiri Th
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.
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 Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.