Page 92 - GSTL_21st May 2020_Vol 36_Part 3

338 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
er, the case may be transferred to her in view of Circular No. 1053/02/2017-CX,
dated 10th March, 2017”.
8. Clearly, the only reason why the said prayer was rejected by the DC
is that taxpayer in the present case is different from the taxpayer whose case is
pending before the PC.
9. The Court sees merit in the contention of the Petitioner that if the
subject matter of both SCNs is the same, viz., charging of service tax on discount
and incentives received by the Petitioner from the car manufacturer, it would be
in the interest of the Respondents themselves that consistent orders are passed in
both the cases.
10. On the above short ground, the Court directs that further proceed-
ings pursuant to the impugned SCN dated 7th October, 2019 be continued before
the PC, Central Goods and Services Tax, Chandigarh.
11. Ordered accordingly.
12. It is made clear that the authorized representative of the Petitioner
will now appear before the PC on the date to be communicated to the Petitioner
by the PC at least seven days in advance.
13. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

_______

2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 338 (Mad.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J.
BVD POWER PVT. LTD.
Versus
STATE TAX OFFICER, GOBICHETTIPALAYAM
W.P. Nos. 2207 & 2266 of 2020 and W.M.P. Nos. 2582 & 2644 of 2020,
decided on 3-2-2020
Appeal to First Appellate Authority under GST - Delay in filing -
Technical glitches in filing - Condonation of delay - Petitioner on being una-
ble to file appeal within time under GST law due to GSTN glitches, filing
appeal manually subsequently which dismissed by Appellate Authority as
being time-barred - Since delay was on account of technical glitches, im-
pugned order set aside - Appeal restored with Appellate Authority who di-
rected to dispose of same on merits within 45 days - Section 107 of Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Article 226 of Constitution of India. [paras
4, 5, 6, 7]
Petitions disposed of
REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar, for the Petitioner.
Shri A.N.R. Jayaprathap, Government Advocate, for
the Respondent.
[Order (Common)]. - By this common order, both the writ petitions are
being disposed. In W.P. No. 2266 of 2020, the petitioner has challenged the im-
GST LAW TIMES  21st May 2020  92