Associate Decor Ltd VS Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

The Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents, and with mutual consent, the case proceeds for disposal. The petitioner seeks to quash an endorsement dated 25.04.2019 (No.ACCT LGSTO-150/T.No.51/19-20, Annexure-‘A’) issued by the first respondent, along with a demand in Form-‘F’ dated 21.12.2018 (Annexure-‘N’). Relief is also sought directing the first respondent to withdraw all best judgment assessment orders passed against.

The Government Advocate accepted notice for the respondents, and with mutual consent, the matter proceeded for disposal. The petitioner sought to quash an endorsement dated 25.04.2019 and a demand in Form-‘F’ dated 21.12.2018 issued by the first respondent. They also requested the first respondent to withdraw all best judgment assessment orders issued from September 2017 to December 2018. The petitioner argued that attachment orders, issued under Section 62 of the CGST Act for the same period, were challenged in W.P.No.40360-40364/2018. The court previously ordered to lift the attachment on the petitioner’s current account, contingent upon filing returns by 07.10.2018, which was fulfilled by a deposit of Rs.2 Crores. However, this amount intended for IGST was wrongly appropriated towards KGST.

The Government Advocate accepted notice for the respondents, and with mutual consent, the case proceeded for resolution. The petitioner sought to annul an endorsement and demand from the first respondent, requesting withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders issued from September 2017 to December 2018. They also sought direction for withdrawal of attachment orders related to these assessments, previously challenged in court. Despite a court order lifting account attachments conditional on timely tax return filing, issues arose over the incorrect appropriation of deposited funds, causing delays in filing. Subsequent court directives aimed for expedited refunds and correct fund allocations, leading to eventual compliance with filing requirements. However, the case was ultimately dismissed as moot in April 2019, though with liberty granted to appeal regarding tax assessments from September 2017 to December 2018.

The Government Advocate accepted notice for the respondents. With mutual consent, the case proceeded. The petitioner sought to quash an endorsement from April 25, 2019, and a demand in Form ‘F’ from December 21, 2018. They also requested the withdrawal of all best judgment assessment orders issued between September 2017 and December 2018. The petitioner argued that previous attachment orders under Section 62 of the CGST Act, related to the same period, were challenged in W.P.No.40360-40364/2018. The court ordered the release of current account attachments but noted conditions for goods attachment release upon timely filing of returns. Despite a Rs. 2 Crore deposit for filing returns, misappropriation towards KGST instead of IGST occurred, acknowledged as wrongful.

The petitioner was unable to file returns despite intentions, per the state’s submission in the September 20, 2018 order. A subsequent directive on February 13, 2019, ordered prompt refunds and IGST account transfers, resolving a modification application. Senior Counsel for the petitioner confirmed credits to the IGST account and timely return filings as ordered on February 13, 2019. However, on April 12, 2019, the petitions were dismissed as infructuous, including a liberty request to appeal best judgment assessments for September 2017 to December 2018.

Respondent no.1 issued an endorsement on April 25, 2019, noting the dismissal of W.P.No.40360-364/2018 on April 12, 2019. While attachment and garnishee notices were withdrawn, best judgment assessment orders for September 2017 to December 2018 remained valid, requiring fulfillment of associated demands. Senior Counsel for the petitioner argued that the April 25, 2019 endorsement overlooked the court’s September 20, 2018 observations in W.P.No.40360-364/2018.

The Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents. With the consent of both parties, the matter is taken up for disposal. The petitioner seeks to quash an endorsement dated 25.04.2019 (No.ACCT LGSTO-150/T.No.51/19-20, Annexure-‘A’) issued by the first respondent, along with the withdrawal of a demand in Form-‘F’ dated 21.12.2018 (Annexure-‘N’). Additionally, the petitioner requests the first respondent to withdraw all best judgment assessment orders issued against them from September 2017 to December 2018, or provide alternative relief.

The petitioner contends that attachment orders issued under Section 62 of the CGST Act for the period mentioned were challenged in W.P.No.40360-40364/2018. By an order dated 20.09.2018, this court directed the attachment of the petitioner’s current account to be lifted upon filing returns by 07.10.2018. Subsequently, the petitioner deposited Rs.2 Crores to facilitate the filing of returns, but this amount was incorrectly appropriated towards KGST instead of IGST, which remains undisputed.

Despite intentions and court directives, the returns could not be filed timely due to these appropriation discrepancies. A later order on 13.02.2019 directed expeditious refunds to rectify the issue, allowing for transfers to the IGST account. The matter was disposed of, with the respondent authorities eventually crediting the amount to the IGST account and the returns being filed within the granted time frame as per the order of 13.02.2019.

However, despite these developments, the petitions were dismissed as infructuous on 12.04.2019, with the petitioner also seeking liberty to appeal the best judgment assessment orders for the period September 2017 to December 2018 under Section 62 of the Act.

In response, respondent no.1 issued an endorsement on 25.04.2019 noting the dismissal of W.P.No.40360-364/2018 and confirming the validity of the best judgment assessment orders for the specified tax period, necessitating compliance with the associated demands.

The Senior Counsel for the petitioner argues that the issuance of Annexure-‘A’ disregards the developments and court observations in W.P.No.40360-364/2018, particularly the state’s commitment to lift attachments upon timely return filings, as recorded in the order of 20.09.2018. It is emphasized that had the returns been filed within the stipulated deposit period, they would have qualified under Section 62(2) of the Act, as specified in the court’s observations.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: