Petitioner sought writ relief for stay of tax recovery due to non-constitution of Appellate Tribunal under B.G.S.T. Act. Court ordered stay conditional on 20% deposit of balance tax and directed filing of appeal once Tribunal becomes functional.
Stay of recovery extended upon 20% deposit; appeal to be filed once Tribunal is constituted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12141 of 2024
======================================================
Sabita Singh, wife of Sri Barun Kumar Singh, resident of village Ward No -27,Donal Allapatti Ahila, PS Darbhanga Bihar. District -Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Prasad Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Additional Solicitor General ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 21-08-2024
The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking multifarious reliefs.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12141 of 2024 dt.21-08-2024 2/4
Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "B.G.S.T. Act").
Tribunal , the petitioner is deprived of his statutory remedy under Sub-Section (8) and Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12141 of 2024 dt.21-08-2024
3/4
(i) Subject to deposit of a sum equal to 20 percent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute, if not already deposited, in addition to the amount deposited earlier under Sub-Section (6) of Section 107 of the B.G.S.T. Act, the petitioner must be extended the statutory benefit of stay under Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act. The petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit, due to non- constitution of the Tribunal by the respondents themselves. The recovery of balance amount, and any steps that may have been taken in this regard will thus be deemed to be stayed. It is not in dispute that similar relief has been granted by this Court in the case of SAJ Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Bihar & Others in C.W.J.C. No. 15465 of 2022 .
(ii) The statutory relief of stay, on deposit of the statutory amount, however in the opinion of this Court, cannot be open ended. For balancing the equities, therefore, the Court is of the opinion that since order is being passed due to nonconstitution of the Tribunal by the respondentAuthorities, the petitioner would be required to present/file his appeal under Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. 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 B.G.S.T. 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.12141 of 2024 dt.21-08-2024 4/4
law.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
| AFR/NAFR | |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 21.08.2024 |
| Transmission Date | N/A |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether statutory benefit of stay under Section 112(9) of B.G.S.T. Act is available despite non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal.
Whether a percentage deposit of 20% is required to secure the stay of recovery pending appeal when the Tribunal is not yet constituted.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
SAJ Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Bihar & OthersReferred¶26
SAJ Food Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Bihar & Others C.W.J.C. No. 15465 of 2022
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Sabita Singh
Union of India
State of Bihar
K. Vinod Chandran
Partha Sarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
