Facts of the
Case
The petitioner, Vivek Kumar, an individual
non-taxable entity and Director of A & T Security Services Pvt. Ltd.,
challenged the appellate order dated 16th May, 2025 passed by the Commissioner
(Appeals), CGST Delhi West, whereby penalties were upheld against the company
and its directors under Sections 122 and 122(3) of the CGST Act.
An inspection conducted on 18th March, 2019
resulted in issuance of a show cause notice dated 12th September, 2019
proposing cancellation of GST registration on the ground of non-filing of
returns. The petitioner submitted that returns were duly filed. Nevertheless,
the registration was cancelled on 29th November, 2019 with zero demand. The
cancellation order was set aside in appeal on 27th August, 2021 subject to
filing of pending returns and payment of dues. Pursuant thereto, the company
deposited a total sum of ₹2,01,20,299 and the GST registration was restored.
Thereafter, a fresh show cause notice dated 31st
July, 2024 was issued alleging fraudulent availment of input tax credit. After
filing reply and attending personal hearing, an order-in-original dated 31st
January, 2025 imposed penalties under Section 122 of the CGST Act. The
appellate authority by order dated 16th May, 2025 upheld penalties against the
company and its directors, including the present petitioner.
Issues
Involved
Whether penalties imposed on a director under the
CGST Act could be sustained without considering substantial tax payments
already made prior to issuance of the show cause notice, whether the appellate
authority failed to consider material facts on record, and whether the
petitioner should be permitted to pursue the statutory appellate remedy without
any further pre-deposit.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The petitioner contended that more than ₹2.01
crores had already been deposited by the company in proceedings relating to
restoration of GST registration much prior to issuance of the show cause notice
dated 31st July, 2024. It was argued that this material fact was specifically
disclosed in the reply dated 2nd September, 2024 but was ignored by both the
adjudicating authority and the appellate authority. The petitioner submitted
that in view of Section 73 of the CGST Act, penalties on directors were
unsustainable and required reconsideration.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel,
fairly conceded that the appellate order dated 16th May, 2025 did not appear to
have considered the aspect of prior payment of ₹2,01,20,299 made by the
petitioner company.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court observed that the documents
placed on record clearly evidenced substantial payments made by the petitioner
company prior to issuance of the show cause notice and that this aspect was
also mentioned in the reply filed by the petitioner. The Court held that
non-consideration of such material facts constituted a lapse in adjudication.
The Court further noted that the impugned order
dated 16th May, 2025 was appealable before the GST Appellate Tribunal, which
had since been constituted and was functional. The Tribunal was directed to
consider all documents evidencing prior payments while adjudicating the appeal.
The Court observed that in terms of Section 73 of the CGST Act, penalties
imposed on directors may not sustain, and even penalties against the company
would require reconsideration in light of earlier payments.
Important
Clarification
The High Court clarified that it had not examined
the merits of the allegations and that all contentions of the petitioner were
left open to be urged before the GST Appellate Tribunal. It was further
clarified that considering the substantial amount already deposited, the
petitioner should not be required to make any further pre-deposit for availing
the appellate remedy.
Final
Outcome
The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to
the petitioner to file an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal by 25th
December, 2025. The Tribunal was directed to entertain the appeal on merits
without dismissing it on the ground of limitation and without insisting on any
further pre-deposit. All pending applications were disposed of accordingly
SOURCE LINK: https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75418112025CW169062025_175814.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general
information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify
the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal,
professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim
all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been
prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment