The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the Goods and Service Tax (GST) appeal cannot be dismissed stating it is not maintainable on account of non-payment of the requisite fee to be deposited as per the Central Goods and Service Tax Act(CGST),2017.
Ms. Aashna Gill, Advocate appeared for the petitioner and Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar appeared for the respondent.
Drafting GST Replies Simplified for Professionals – Enroll Now
M/s. Imaging Solutions (P) Ltd, the petitioner submitted that while the petitioner was ready to deposit the requisite fee, the Authority did not allow the petitioner to deposit the remaining amount of Rs.10,000/- and has wrongly dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.
It was further submitted that while the appeal may be held to be incomplete and incompetent for want of deposition of fee it could not be held to be not maintainable. State counsel submitted that the appeal was rightly dismissed as incompetent and incomplete for want of deposition of the requisite fee. However, she fairly states that if the petitioner would have deposited the remaining amount, the appeal should have been heard on merits and would not be held to be not maintainable.
Drafting GST Replies Simplified for Professionals – Enroll Now
While passing order under Section 101(1) of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Appellate Authority has found that the appellant had failed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rs.5,000/- for the CGST + Rs.5,000/- for HGST) as fee for hearing of the appeal while the appellant was required to deposit a total sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs.10,000/- for CGST + Rs.10,000/- for HGST) as fee. The Authority held that the appeal was incomplete for want of deposition of the requisite fee, as mandated under the GST law. While dismissing the appeal, it held that the appeal to be rejected as not maintainable.
Drafting GST Replies Simplified for Professionals – Enroll Now
While allowing the appeal, the Division Bench consisting of Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sanjay Vashisth held that “on account of the non-payment of the requisite fee, an appeal cannot be dismissed as not maintainable, and in fact, before the Appellate Authority takes up any appeal, the appellant should be informed of any deficiency and be given a chance to deposit and remove the deficiency, if any. “
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
