Challenge against Demand for short payment of GST: Orissa HC Directs to file Appeal u/s 112 of CGST/OGST Act [Read Order]

In a significant case, the High Court of Orissa directed the petitioner to file a GST appeal under Section 112 of Central Goods and Service Tax ( CGST/OGST ) Act, 2017 for the  challenge against the demand for short payment of tax.

Choudhury Bibhuti Bhusan S filed the petition against the order demanding tax against the short payment of GST. Mr. Panigrahi, advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submitted that there was demand made by the State authority for short payment of goods and services tax. The appeal filed by petitioner was rejected.

Know When to Say No to Cash Transactions, Click Here

Being aggrieved by part of the appellate order, the petitioner wanted to challenge the same but there is no Tribunal functioning. The petitioner prayed for adjudication of challenge to the appellate order, by which he is aggrieved. The petitioner has paid the demand of tax.

It was submitted by the counsel that the relief sought by his client is covered by order dated 16th February, 2024 made by the first Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions, lead case of M/s. Maa Tarini Traders.In the case it was held that “since order is being passed due to non- constitution of the Tribunal by the respondent-Authorities, the Petitioner would be required to present/file his appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/OGST Act, once the Tribunal is constituted and made functional and the President or the State President may enter office. The appeal would be required to be filed observing the statutory requirements after coming into existence of the Tribunal, for facilitating consideration of the appeal.

(iii) In case the petitioner chooses not to avail the remedy of appeal by filing any appeal under section 112 of the CGST/OGST Act before the Tribunal within the period which may be specified upon constitution of the Tribunal, the respondent-Authorities would be at liberty to proceed further in the matter, in accordance with law.”

Know When to Say No to Cash Transactions, Click Here

Mr. Das, advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appeared on behalf of the department. He does not dispute that the writ petition stands covered. The first Division Bench directed a quantum of deposit with liberty to parties inasmuch as, petitioners could avail of their remedy upon constitution of the Tribunal and in event they or any one of them does not do so within time provided upon reconstitution, the department would be free to proceed.

A division bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice M.S. Sahoo disposed of the as covered by M/s. Maa Tarini Traders (supra), as applicable in the facts.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates