M/S. First Source Solutions Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. First Source Solutions Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 01.10.2024, passed by the 1st respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Trichy I Division. The order pertained to the tax period 2017-2018. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel informed the Court that the petitioner intended to file an appeal against the impugned assessment order and sought liberty to do so. The petitioner also expressed willingness to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount as additional pre-deposit while filing the appeal. The respondent's counsel requested the Court to pass appropriate orders regarding the filing of the appeal on terms.

Held

The Court held that it was inclined to dismiss the present writ petition while granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned assessment order. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's submission that they were willing to file an appeal and had restricted their relief to seeking liberty to do so. The Court noted the petitioner's willingness to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount as an additional pre-deposit. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned Appellate Authority within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order, subject to the payment of 10% of the disputed tax amount as agreed. The Appellate Authority was directed to consider the appeal on its merits, providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and without pressing for limitation, if the appeal was otherwise in order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file an appeal against the impugned assessment order dated 01.10.2024, despite the writ petition challenging the said order? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they are willing to file an appeal against the impugned assessment order and that granting liberty to file such an appeal would be sufficient to meet their case. They further submitted their willingness to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount as an additional pre-deposit while filing the appeal. Revenue's Arguments: The respondent's counsel requested the Court to pass any appropriate orders with regard to the filing of the appeal on terms, indicating no objection to the petitioner's request for liberty to appeal.