Order Date – 19 June 2025

Parties: Kaushal Kumar Vs State of Bihar & Ors.

Facts – 

• The Petitioner, Kaushal Kumar, filed an appeal against the demand order for the period October 2018 to March 2019.
• The appeal was dismissed on the erroneous ground that the payment certificate produced by the petitioner in support of the Tax Deducted at Source by the Works Department for the period in question is not signed by the Executive Engineer.
• The Petitioner contended that order was passed without proper verification of records or supporting materials. Due to lack of GST Appellate Tribunal, he could not further appeal the orders.

Issue –

• Whether coercive recovery actions should be stayed due to non-constitution of the GST Tribunal?

Order – 

• The Divisional bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that it was held in the case of M/s Maa Sunaina Construction Private Limited that “The petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit, due to non-constitution of the Tribunal by the respondents themselves. The recovery of balance amount, and any steps that may have been taken in this regard will thus be deemed to be stayed.”
• Subject to deposit of a sum equal to 10 percent of the amount of tax in dispute, if not already deposited, in addition to the amount deposited earlier under Sub-Section (6) of Section 107 of the B.G.S.T. Act, the petitioner must be extended the statutory benefit of stay under Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act. 
• In the aforesaid view of the matter, this Court disposes of the present writ application in terms of paragraph ‘3’ of the judgment dated 21.10.2024 passed in CWJC No. 14554 of 2024.