9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The petitioner has challenged an order dated 09.04.2021 passed by the Principal Commissioner, GST, Guwahati, the respondent No. 2 thereby rejecting an application of the petitioner seeking for special rate fixation on the ground of delay. The said order dated 09.04.2021 was passed vide order No. 01/SR(16-17 and 17-18)/PR.COMMR/2021-22. The other order challenged in this writ petition was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Goods and Services Tax, Guwahati Division-II GST, respondent No. 3 dated 05.02.2021 addressed to the respondent No. 5, State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, Guwahati demanding an amount of Rs. 4,37,27,129/- the purported refund of 50% in terms of interim order passed by the Apex Court in the SLP filed by Union of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and allowed the WP(C) 317/2014 preferred by the petitioner and tagged with Writ Appeal No. 243/2009. The Union of India preferred SLP before the Apex Court thereby challenging the judgment and order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this court. The Apex Court vide order dated 07.12.2015 passed in SLP (Civil) No. 11878/2015 directed the present respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to release 50% of the amount due under the head of Central Excise to the petitioner against the solvent security as an interim measure. On the basis of the said interim order, the respondent No. 3 sanctioned refund of 50% of the entitled amount to the petitioner amounting Rs. 4,37,27,129/- vide order dated 29.03.2019. It would not be out of place to mention that the Apex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing for direction from this court to the respondent No. 2 for disposal of the representation dated 04.02.2021 seeking for fixing of special rate as per the notification dated 27.03.2009. On the basis of the direction passed by this court the respondent No. 2 disposed of the said representation dated 04.02.2021 thereby rejecting the prayer made by the petitioner for fixing of special rate as per the notification dated 27.03.2008. The said order was passed by the respondent No. 2 vide order dated 09.04.2021. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 09.04.2021 by the respondent No. 2 the petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the said order and the grounds thereof. Dr. Saraf submits that the ground in rejecting the prayer made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Further it is his contention that even if there was delay the said delay ought to have been condoned in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 23.03.2020 in Misc Appeal No. 03/2020 whereby limitation period prescribed for filing various petitions etc were extended. Accordingly, he sought for issuance of notice with an interim protection thereby staying the operation of the order dated 09.04.2021 of the respondent No. 2 and the subsequent attachment notice dated 05.02.201 addressed to the AGM, State Bank of India, Commercial Branch at Guwahati by the respondent No. 2. Mr. Keyal on the other hand countering the submission of Mr. Saraf supported the finding of the respondent No. 2 as reflected in the order dated 09.04.2021. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
