M/S. John Buildwell INDIA PVT LTD vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise

Held

The Court allowed the Review Application, disposing of it in terms of the petitioner's submission. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Tribunal within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order. Upon filing such an appeal, all further recovery proceedings against the petitioner were to be kept in abeyance. The Appellate Authority was directed to entertain the appeal and dispose of it on merits and in accordance with law, leaving all issues open for the petitioner to canvass before it. The ratio is that when a substantial portion of disputed tax has been recovered and the assessee wishes to pursue statutory remedies, liberty may be granted to file an appeal out of time, with recovery proceedings stayed pending appeal.

Facts

This matter concerns a Review Application filed by M/s. John Buildwell Indian Pvt. Ltd. (the petitioner) seeking to review an order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the High Court in W.P.(MD) No.8574 of 2024. The petitioner had challenged an action by the Joint Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (the respondent). The petitioner stated that a sum of Rs. 33,15,092/- was recovered by attaching its bank account, and a further Rs. 2,57,926/- was recovered from Input Tax Credit (ITC), totaling more than 10% of the disputed tax. The petitioner expressed willingness to pursue remedies before the Appellate Commissioner due to subsequent developments, citing a previous High Court order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, considering the recovery of over 10% of the disputed tax and subsequent developments. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that due to the recovery of a significant portion of the disputed tax (over 10%) and citing the High Court's order in Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure Vs. The Special Secretary, Head of GST Counsel Secretariat and others, they should be allowed to pursue their remedy before the Appellate Commissioner. They highlighted the recovery of Rs. 33,15,092/- from their bank account and Rs. 2,57,926/- from ITC. Respondent's contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent regarding the petitioner's request to file a statutory appeal. The respondent was represented by Senior Standing Counsel.