Impressive Data Services Private Limited vs Commissioner (Appeals-I), Central Tax GST, Delhi
Facts:
The petitioner challenged the requirement of pre-deposit under Section 107(6) of the CGST Act for filing an appeal against proceedings arising from a show cause notice dated 14.06.2022 alleging wrongful availment of input tax credit for the period 2017-18 to 2019-20. The petitioner sought waiver of the pre-deposit on the ground of financial hardship and amounts allegedly receivable from Government departments.
Court Decision:
The Court held that Section 107(6) mandates payment of the admitted amount of tax, interest, penalty and a pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed tax for filing an appeal. The provision does not confer discretion on the Court to waive the statutory pre-deposit requirement.
The Court declined the request for waiver of pre-deposit and held that the petitioner must comply with the statutory requirement. However, the petitioner was permitted to approach the Appellate Authority and request adjustment of amounts already lying with the department or government entities towards the pre-deposit. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to pursue the remedy before the appellate authority.
Cases Referred by Court:
- Shubh Impex v. Union of India, (2018) 361 ELT 199 (Del)
- Anjani Technoplast Ltd. v. CCE, (2017) 348 ELT A132 (SC)
- Diamond Entertainment Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Tax Commissionerate, Dehradun & Anr.
- Pioneer Corporation v. Union of India, (2016) 340 ELT 63
- Manoj Kumar Jha v. DRI, (2019) 365 ELT 166 (Del)
- Vice-Chancellor, University of Allahabad v. Dr. Anand Prakash Mishra
- A.B. Bhaskara Rao v. CBI
- Manish Goel v. Rohini Goel
- State of Bihar v. Arvind Kumar
Other Case Law
Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Center & Batch vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST) & Others
Whether GST registrations cancelled under Section 29(2)(c) of CGST/TNGST Acts for non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months can be restored by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, even where the statutory period of limit
BACKGROUNDA batch of 27 Writ Petitions was filed by various small traders and bu...
Read MoreShri Girish Kumar Raval vs. Union of India & Others
Whether penalty and liability under Section 122(1-A) and Section 137 of the CGST Act can be imposed on an employee of a company for alleged GST defaults of the company — i.e., applicability of vicarious liability on employees under the GST Act.
BACKGROUNDThe petitioner, an individual employee, was subjected to imposition of...
Read MoreBiharilal Chhaterpal vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
Seizure of goods and penalty for absence of e-way bill in inter-State movement – Sections 129 and 68 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20(xv) of the IGST Act, 2017 and Rule 138 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
Facts:The petitioner’s goods (barbed wire) being transported from Raipur (Chha...
Read More