JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT OF THE GST & CENTRAL EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT REGARDING ORDERS EXCEEDING ₹10,00,000 (ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT)

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 M/s Mansoori Enterprises

Versus

Union of India

Writ Tax No. 35 of 2024

Date of Judgement/Order : 23/02/2024

Issue:- In the case of Mansoori Enterprises vs. Union of India (U.O.I), the Allahabad High Court addressed a significant issue regarding the jurisdictional boundaries of the GST & Central Excise Superintendent in issuing orders that exceed Rs. 10,00,000 under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act.

 JUDGEMENT:

1. Heard Sri Dheeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri K. D. Nag for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20/11/2023 passed under Section 73 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as CGST Act) which was passed by Superintendent, Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Range – Bahraich.
3. The main ground of challenge to the said order was that respondent No.3 did not have jurisdiction to pass the said order in light of the circular dated 09/02/2018 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. It is in aforesaid facts that learned counsel for respondent No.s 2 and 3 was granted time to seek instructions and and following orders were passed:-                                                                                                  

    “1.  Heard Sri Dheeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri K.D. Nag, Learned Senior Standing                   Counsel has filed memo of appearance on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, same is taken on record.

1. 2. In the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.11.2023, passed by the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Bahraich, under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise Act, 2017, disallowing ITC for an amount of 16,24,246.88.
   3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset submits that the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise did not had jurisdiction to pass such Considering the fact that respondents themselves have issued an order on 09/02/2018 assigning the jurisdiction to various authorities in relation to the maximum amount of Central Tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit of central tax wrongly availed or utilized.
   4. It is stated that according to the circular dated 09/02/2018, power of the Superintendent, Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise is limited to the matter not exceeding 10,00,000/- and in the present case the amount involved is more than Rs.16,00,000/- and consequently,  the  impugned  order passed  by  it  is  without jurisdiction.

1. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted two days time to seek instructions in this regard.
   6. List this case on 2024, amongst top ten cases.”

4. Sri K. D. Nag, on the basis of written instructions received from Assistant Commissioner, Central GST and Central            Excise Division, Lucknow -IV, Barabanki, has fairly submitted that the impugned order dated 11.2023 is not proper         to the extent that it was not passed by proper officer as per the Circular No.31/05/2018-GST dated 9th February,           2018 as the monetary limit of the input tax credit wrongly availed or utilized of central tax is Ten Lakhs and           State Tax Rs. Ten Lakhs, totaling to Rs. Twenty Lakhs for issuance of show cause notices and passing of                orders under Sections 73 and 74 of CGST Act.

5. In light of the above instructions received by learned counsel for the respondents, evidently the impugned order           dated 20.11.2023, as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, is without jurisdiction and is accordingly set aside.     Liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law.