M/S Arr Ess Bros vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court noted that the writ petition was entertained because the GST Tribunal was not functional at the time of filing. However, since the GST Tribunal has now commenced functioning at Bhopal, the petitioner has the option to file an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 121 of the GST Act. The Court directed that if such an appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of the order, it shall be entertained on its merits. The Court also stated that 10% of the impugned demand, which was deposited by the petitioner in compliance with an interim order, shall be adjusted towards the pre-deposit required before the Tribunal. The counsel for the respondents did not object to this limited relief. The Court did not decide the merits of the original challenge to the Order-in-Original or the Order-in-Appeal.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s ARR ESS BROS, filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Appeal dated 08.05.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Bhopal. This order dismissed the petitioner's statutory appeal for non-appearance, without considering the merits or written submissions. The petitioner also challenged the Order-in-Original dated 15.02.2024, which confirmed the reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC), along with interest and penalty, based on a discrepancy between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. The writ petition was initially entertained as the GST Tribunal was not functional at that time.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order-in-Appeal dated 08.05.2025, which dismissed the petitioner's statutory appeal for non-appearance without examining the merits or written submissions, is liable to be quashed? (Question of law). Petitioner's contention: The appellate authority erred by dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of non-appearance, failing to consider the merits and the written submissions filed by the petitioner. Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the petitioner can avail the remedy of appeal before the newly functional GST Tribunal? (Question of law). Petitioner's contention: The writ petition was filed when the Tribunal was not functional, and now that it is functional, the petitioner should be allowed to approach it. Revenue's contention: The counsel for the respondents had no objection to the petitioner availing the remedy before the Tribunal.