M/S Archita Soap And Chemical LLP vs. Joint Commissioner (Appeals)

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s Archita Soap And Chemical LLP, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 09.09.2024 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 107(11) of the Chhattisgarh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, and a subsequent order dated 10.03.2025 rejecting their application under Section 161 of the same Act. The Petitioner's counsel submitted that the Ministry of Finance, through Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST dated 11.07.2024, provided guidelines for recovery of outstanding dues when the Appellate Tribunal is not yet constituted. This circular allows taxpayers to make pre-deposit payments and file an undertaking to stay recovery of the remaining demand. The State counsel did not oppose the Petitioner's prayer.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to comply with the conditions stipulated in Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST dated 11.07.2024. The Petitioner was granted permission to file an undertaking/declaration with the jurisdictional proper officer, affirming their intent to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal as and when it becomes operational, within the timelines specified in Section 112 of the CGST Act. Additionally, the Petitioner was directed to pay the pre-deposit amount as per sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the CGST Act within 15 days from the receipt of the order. The Court ordered that upon fulfilling these conditions, the recovery of the remaining amount of the confirmed demand shall remain stayed, in accordance with sub-section (9) of Section 112 of the CGST Act. The Court clarified that this order would lose its efficacy if the amount was not deposited within the stipulated period. No specific issue was left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner can avail the benefit of the guidelines issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) in Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST dated 11.07.2024, concerning the payment of pre-deposit and filing of an undertaking to stay recovery of confirmed demand, in light of the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST provides a mechanism for taxpayers to make pre-deposit payments and file an undertaking with the jurisdictional officer, thereby staying the recovery of the remaining confirmed demand until the Appellate Tribunal becomes operational. They relied on paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of the said circular, which detail the procedure for making such payments and filing the undertaking. The Petitioner sought liberty to comply with these circular provisions. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State Counsel did not oppose the prayer made by the Petitioner.