M/S Shankar Traders Through Its Proprietor Shri Manoj Pinjani vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the instruction dated 18.03.2020 (Annexure P/2) extends the benefit to assessees by extending the period of limitation for approaching the Tribunal. This extension is applicable from the date the Tribunal is constituted, not from the date of communication of the First Appellate Authority's order. Therefore, the petitioner, even if they wait for the constitution of the Tribunal, will not suffer the rigors of the expiry of the period of limitation. The Court declined to interfere with the matter at this stage and disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner-assessee to avail the benefit under the said instruction or to revisit the Court if any fresh cause of action arises. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shankar Traders, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 10.07.2019 passed by the First Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the SGST Act, 2017. The petitioner stated that the tax in question had already been deposited and requested that no coercive steps be taken. The petitioner also brought to the court's notice an instruction dated 18.03.2020 issued by the CBIC & Customs, specifically paragraph 4.2, which addressed the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal and the extension of the limitation period for filing appeals. The court considered this instruction in relation to the petitioner's ability to file an appeal to the tribunal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner can avail the benefit of the extended limitation period for filing an appeal to the appellate tribunal, as provided by the Central Goods and Services Tax (Ninth Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019, in light of the non-constitution of the tribunal? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the instruction issued by CBIC & Customs dated 18.03.2020, particularly paragraph 4.2, provides a mechanism to overcome the difficulty arising from the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal, thereby extending the period for filing an appeal. They relied on this instruction to suggest that their right to appeal would not be prejudiced by the delay in tribunal constitution. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (State of Madhya Pradesh and its tax authorities).