Page 226 - GSTL_2nd July 2020 _Vol 38_Part 1

144 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
Besides, there is not even an iota of evidence established by the AA
pointing out the wilfulness in the omission to file the return in Form
GSTR-3B and/or in the determined suppression of outward tax.
None of the facts that could give rise to the inferences of the ‘wilful-
ness’ are specified in the very brief pre-common assessment Show
Cause Notice and also in the common assessment orders in Form
GST ASMT-13. Hence, the levy of penalty @ 100% of determined
turnovers are also to be deleted. It is ordered accordingly.
Conclusion :
For the above anomalies discussed, a case is made in favour of the
appellant to struck down the penalty as the levy is not justifiable.
Hence, the total penalty of Rs. 36,22,84,718/- annulled and appeal al-
lowed on this aspect in favour of the appellant.
(3) Regarding, levy of interest of Rs. 2,76,31,152/- :
Before embarking on adjudication of this issue, it is very much es-
sential to have a comprehensive understanding of Section 50 of GST
Act, 2017, which are abstracted below :
Section 50.
(1) Every person who is liable to pay tax in accordance with the
provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, but fails to pay
the tax or any part thereof to the Government within the period
prescribed, shall for the period for which the tax or any part thereof
remains unpaid, pay, on his own, interest at such rate, not exceed-
ing eighteen per cent., as may be notified by the Government on the
recommendations of the Council. Interest on delayed payment of
tax.
(2) The interest under sub-section (1) shall be calculated, in such
manner as may be prescribed, from the day succeeding the day on
which such tax was due to be paid.
(3) A taxable person who makes an undue or excess claim of input
tax credit under sub-section (10) of section 42 or undue or excess
reduction in output tax liability under sub-section (10) of section 43,
shall pay interest on such undue or excess claim or on such undue
or excess reduction, as the case may be, at such rate not exceeding
twenty-four per cent., as may be notified by the Government on the
recommendations of the Council.
A plain understanding of the above section clearly envisages that,
whenever any dealer failed to discharge applicable tax in time, is li-
able to pay interest @ 18% for the delayed period.
Conclusion :
Therefore, the levy of interest is upheld, but the A.A is directed to
compute leviable interest as on date against the actual tax to be paid
by the appellant as discussed at above paras. In the end, appeal on
this aspect is confirmed. The appellant also not advanced any objec-
tions on this aspect.
Result of the Appeal :
26. In the end, the assessment is partly modified, partly annulled and partly
confirmed on the levy made by the assessing authority.
_______
GST LAW TIMES  2nd July 2020  226