Court :
Chhattisgarh High Court
Brief :
The Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of M/sAbis Export India Private Limited v. State of Chhattisgarh, [WPT No. 100 of 2019], held that the amendment to Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) regarding the imposition of the interest on late payment of tax has a retrospective effect.
Citation :
WPT No. 100 of 2019
The Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of M/sAbis Export India Private Limited v. State of Chhattisgarh, [WPT No. 100 of 2019], held that the amendment to Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) regarding the imposition of the interest on late payment of tax has a retrospective effect.
M/s Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) is engaged in a business of producing a variety of goods, including pet food. After the CGST Act came into effect, the commodity of pet food was assigned the Harmonized System Code (“HSN”) carrying the number 2309.
The aforementioned goods are taxable under the CGST Act, although there are no specific instructions or notifications about taxation of animal and pet food, which is included in the index under Chapter 23 HSN 2309. The Petitioner sold pet food and animal feed to several distributors without including GST, and filed a return.
However, over time it became clear that all animal feed is tax-exempt, with an exception of pet food, and the GST provisions came out of the shadows. The Petitioner's company approached the authority, demonstrating the discrepancy between its GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B, and asked for guidance regarding the mechanism to correct its return, but because the mechanism was not available, the return could not be corrected.
However, the Petitioner on his own set-off the tax liability in the return submitted in March 2018 for the month of July 2017 to September 2017, and it has been further argued that there is no tax liability with the Petitioner because the Petitioner has neither claimed any input credits for pet food nor charged the same to the customer to whom it was sold.
The Petitioner filed an appeal against the decision, which was rejected on the grounds that the Petitioner had disregarded Section 107(6), of the CGST Act, according to which no appeal shall be filed under sub-section (1) unless the appellant has paid the tax as provided in Section (a) & (b) of the CGST Act.
While the writ petition was pending, the Government of India revised Section 50 of the CGST Act, and added a proviso that became effective as of July 1, 2017. This was done via a Gazette notification published on March 28, 2021.
The Petitioner filed I.A. No. 02/2021, which was an application for disposal of the writ petition in view of the Gazette Notification dated March 28, 2021, mainly contending that the said notification has created a method so that the tax dues on supplies supplied and reported in the return for the said provided after the deadline in compliance with Section 39 of the CGST Act, except when such return is provided after the beginning of any action under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act must be paid on the tax component that is debiting the electronic cash register. This Petition may be dismissed in light of the Central Government's modification, and liberty was requested to approach the authority for a new decision on the appeal after benefiting from the Central Government's revision, which became effective on July 1, 2017.
The State responded by refuting the Petitioner's claims, and argued that the Petitioner is not entitled to any benefits from this amended provision.
Whether the amendment to Section 50 of the CGST Act has retrospective effect?
The Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in WPT No. 100 of 2019held as under: