6 Aug 2021 1:46 PM GMT
Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Centre for not constituting an appellate tribunal under the CGST Act even after 4 years of the Act having come into force. " The CGST act came into force about 4 years back, you have been unable to create any appellate tribunal at all." CJI told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta A Division Bench of CJI Ramana and Justice Surya Kant observed that...
Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Centre for not constituting an appellate tribunal under the CGST Act even after 4 years of the Act having come into force.
" The CGST act came into force about 4 years back, you have been unable to create any appellate tribunal at all." CJI told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta
A Division Bench of CJI Ramana and Justice Surya Kant observed that there has to an appellate tribunal under the Act for persons aggrieved by orders of appellate or revisional authority. However, the same has not been constituted yet.
"For a person aggrieved by order passed by appellate authority under section 107 or revisional authority under 108 of the Act, an appellate tribunal has to be there period in 3 months time under 112. Under 109 of the CGST Act, you have to create a Tribunal." The Bench said.
While asking the Advocate on Record to take notice, the Bench asked SG Mehta appearing for Union of India to get back to the Court on the issue of constitution of a GST Appellate Tribunal.
"You passed an administrative order on 3rd December, 2019 on unending limitation. The order was passed by Ministry of Finance to increase limitation provided on Section 112 of the Act due to non constitution of Tribunal. What is this?" CJI remarked.
The Bench was hearing a writ petition filed seeking directions for constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal , New Delhi, on utmost priority basis and as early as possible, in the interest of justice.
According to the petitioner, the constitution of National and other Benches of appellate tribunal under Section 109 of the CGST Act, 2017 has become an absolute necessity of the hour and the Respondents cannot drag its constitution for an indefinite period.
The plea filed by Advocate Amit Sahni through Advocate Preeti Singh has argued that the citizen aggrieved of the orders passed by appellate/revisional authority, are constrained to approach the respective High Courts under 226 by way of Writ Petition. This is due to the absence of an appellate tribunal and the same is overburdening the High Courts as well.
Further, it has been argued the period of limitation to file appeal before the Tribunal (90 days) cannot be extended by way of administrative order by the respondent in contravention of statutory provisions, and more particularly, such extension cannot be given for an indefinite period.
The plea has stated that in a plethora of cases, the apex court has held that justice delayed is justice denied. However, in absence of an Appellate Tribunal, the litigants are not able to get justice within a reasonable period, and the same is causing extreme hardship to the litigants across the Country.
Also during the hearing, the bench expressed concerns over the mounting vacancies in various tribunals and sought immediate response from the Centre.
It Seems Bureaucracy Doesn't Want Tribunals; Sorry State Of Affairs': Supreme Court Seeks 'Clear Stand' Of Centre On Filling Vacancies
Case Title: Amit Sahni vs Union of India