Allowed

M/s Raiyan Traders v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Sept 2024CWJC/12994/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A proprietorship firm's GST appeal was rejected because its ten per cent predeposit was paid from the Electronic Credit Ledger rather than the Cash Ledger. Relying on an earlier Division Bench ruling and Notification No. 53/2023, this court held the appeal maintainable, set aside the rejection order and directed consideration on merits.

What did the court decide?

Rejection of the appeal (order dated 14.01.2023) set aside; Appellate Authority directed to consider the appeal on merits as maintainable via Credit Ledger predeposit.

M/s Raiyan Traders Vs The State of Bihar — GST and Indirect Tax | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12994 of 2024

¶2

======================================================

¶3

M/s Raiyan Traders a proprietorship firm having its place of business at A.K. Market, Mahatma Gandhi Setu, Pahari, Patna - 800007 through its proprietor namely Md. Imran Alam male aged about 42 years son of Md. Wahabuddin resident of Phulwarisharif, Makhdum Rasti Nagar, Phulwarisharif, Patna - 801505.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of State Taxes, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeals), Patna East Division, Patna.

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Patna City West Circle, Patna City, Patna. (December 2018)

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Mukund Kumar, Advocate Mr. Akash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Aditya Raman, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Standing Counsel (11) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶11

Date : 06-09-2024

¶12

The issue raised in the above writ petition is as to whether on filing an appeal the ten per cent of the due amounts are to be paid from the Electronic Cash Ledger or the Electronic Credit Ledger.

¶13

In the present case, the petitioner paid the ten per cent amount from the Electronic Credit Ledger. The Appellate Authority by order dated 14.01.2023 rejected the appeal on the

¶14

Patna High Court CWJC No.12994 of 2024 dt.06-09-2024 2/3

¶15

ground that the ten per cent has to be paid from the Electronic Cash Ledger. In fact, the said position has been accepted after going into the various provisions of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for brevity “GST Act”) by a Division Bench of this Court in M/s Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Bihar & Ors.(CWJC No. 1848 of 2023 & anrlogous cases) , decided on 19.09.2023. However, observations in Paragraphs 77 and 78 of the said judgment have been stayed on 04.12.2023 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 25437 of 2023 .

¶16

We also notice from Notification No. 53/2023 dated 02.11.2023 issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs), which permitted filing of delayed appeals even beyond the period provided under Section 107 of the GST Act, that the stipulation was of paying an amount of 12.5 per cent of the amounts pending and due to be paid to the Department as against the 10 per cent prescribed by the statute. In the said Notification issued by the Central Government on the recommendation of the GST Council, it has been specifically stated that at least 20 per cent of the 12.5 per cent remaining due and payable should be paid from the Electronic Cash Ledger. Hence, even the GST Council understood the ten per cent to be enabled for payment through the Electronic Credit Ledger.

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.12994 of 2024 dt.06-09-2024 3/3

¶18

We are not differing from the Division Bench judgment which being a Coordinate Bench binds us. However, we notice that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has stayed the Division Bench judgment and in such circumstances, especially since consideration of the appeal on merits is the question raised before us, we are of the opinion that pending decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the appeal should be considered on merits.

¶19

We hence, set aside the order in appeal dated 14.01.2023 and direct the same to be considered on merits. It is pointed out that in the present case, already ten per cent of the amount remaining due and payable is remitted from the Electronic Credit Ledger which would make the appeal maintainable and the Appellate Authority shall consider it on merits.

¶20

The writ petition is allowed with the above directions.

¶21

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

¶22

( Nani Tagia, J)

¶23

aditya/-

¶24

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	06.09.2024.
Transmission Date

M/s Raiyan Traders v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Raiyan Traders v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Prakash Vs The State of Bihar

Kaushik Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary

Titu Badwal Vs The State of Bihar

Kailash Prasad Yadav Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

The Bihar State University Service Commission Vs Amiya Shekhar