2018 (9) TMI 610 – GUJARAT HIGH COURT – 2018 (17) G. S. T. L. 370 (Guj.) – Constitutional validity of section 47 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 – Penalty – principal contentions of the petitioners are that the Government is trying to recover penalty in the guise of late fee charges – Held that:- The petitioners who are themselves active tax consultants and tax practitioners have challenged the vires of section 47 of CGST Act. They are obviously indirectly concerned with the same.
–
There are millions of dealers who would be adversely affected by the provisions made therein. There is no reason why such an issue should be examined in a public interest petition when, the group of persons whom the statute affects does not suffer from any handicap preventing them from taking up the litigation themselves and pursuing it.
–
Petition dismissed. – R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 161 of 2018 Dated:- 30-8-2018 – MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR.B.N. KARIA JJ. Appearance: MR. RAJ S TANN
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
) of section 47 further provides that any registered person who fails to furnish the return as required under section 44 by the due date would be liable to pay a late fee of one hundred rupees for every day of delay subject to a maximum of an amount calculated at a quarter per cent of his turnover. Principal contentions of the petitioners are that the Government is trying to recover penalty in the guise of late fee charges. As a result, the dealers losing their valuable right of appeals as well as right to point out that there was sufficient cause preventing them from filing the return within the due date. It was argued before us that in all previous laws which have been repealed by the statutes enacted under the new GST regime, such charges were categorized as penal in nature. Various practical difficulties in filing the returns including such as malfunctioning of the official portal which often times, prevents uploading of the returns were cited. 2. We are not inclined to entertain t
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
. Nevertheless, even after such expansion, public interest is confined to environmental issues, the issues of public accountability and such like. The reference in this respect can be made to the decision of Supreme Court in case of State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal and ors reported in (2013) 3 SCC 402. 3. In the present petition, the petitioners who are themselves active tax consultants and tax practitioners have challenged the vires of section 47 of CGST Act. They are obviously indirectly concerned with the same. As noted, they pointed out that there are millions of dealers who would be adversely affected by the provisions made therein. There is no reason why such an issue should be examined in a public interest petition when, as noted above, the group of persons whom the statute affects does not suffer from any handicap preventing them from taking up the litigation themselves and pursuing it. 4. Petition is dismissed. – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Ta
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =