The Madras High Court directed the GST Officer to hear a plea in respect of charging of interest for delayed GST Payment under Section 50 of the CGST Act.
The petitioner, S R & Sons is a Partnership Firm. The petitioner has its factory at Karumathampatti, Coimbatore District. The petitioner has been involved in the activity of manufacture of knitted and crocheted fabrics. The petitioner has a registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and an assessee under the GST regime with the respondent, Assistant Commissioner.
Mr.N.Prasad, counsel for the petitioner contended that under Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, interest on delayed payment of tax shall be charged. However, the petitioner has raised certain valid grounds, as the first respondent failed to adjudicate the factual as well as the legal grounds raised. The circular referred in the impugned order dated March 28, 2019 is not in dispute. However, the applicability or otherwise has to be considered.
Mr.N.Prasad reiterated that the petitioner has no serious grievance against the said order in original dated 11.11.2020. As far as the interest portion is concerned, the petitioner is having certain grievances and to redress the said grievances, he approached the authorities by way of a representation dated 03.11.2020 and the said representation is to be disposed of by the Authority Competent, as the authority is bound to decide the same on merits with reference to Section 73(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 142(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, appearing on behalf of the first respondent disputed the said contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner by stating that the order in original passed on 11.11.2020 is an appealable order and the impugned order also grants liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal in the manner known to law. Thus, the writ petitions are to be rejected.
The single judge bench of Justice S.N. Subramanian directed the respondent authority to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and pass an order on merits and in accordance with law and by affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of twelve weeks. The writ petitioner is directed to cooperate with the first respondent for the early disposal of the application by submitting all relevant documents and evidence or the rulings relied upon.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
