Barjinder Singh Kohli vs The Assistant Commissioner of Revenue & Ors.
Facts:
The petitioner challenged an appellate order dated 15.05.2025 passed under Section 107 dismissing the appeal against an adjudication order under Section 74 dated 07.01.2025. The appeal was filed on 26.04.2025, beyond three months but within the condonable period of one month under Section 107(4). The appellate authority rejected the appeal on the grounds of delay and non-payment of pre-deposit though the adjudication order determined only interest and penalty and no tax demand.
Court Decision:
The Court held that under Section 107(6) as it stood at the time of filing the appeal, pre-deposit was required only in respect of the amount of tax in dispute. Since the impugned order involved only penalty and interest and there was no tax demand, there was no statutory requirement of pre-deposit. The Court observed that the proviso mandating pre-deposit even for penalty-only orders was inserted by the Finance Act, 2025 with effect from 01.10.2025 and was not applicable to the present case.
The Court found that the appellate authority erred in rejecting the appeal for non-payment of pre-deposit. The matter was remanded to the Appellate Authority to consider the petitioner’s application for condonation of delay. If the delay is condoned, the appellate authority shall hear the appeal on merits without insisting on pre-deposit.
Other Case Law
Ravinder Mehta v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Regular bail in a trap case under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — whether an accused can be kept in custody where the charge-sheet stands filed but sanction for prosecution has still not been granted, leaving the trial court unable
B A C K G R O U N DThe appellant figured as an accused in FIR registered in Dece...
Read MoreThe Commissioner of Central Tax, Mysore Audit Commissionerate & Ors. vs. Sadguru Infratech Pvt Ltd.
Whether a writ court can direct the GST authorities to permit filing/amendment of returns while waiving interest, penalty and limitation under the GST Acts, and to refrain from precipitative action, in respect of the incremental tax burden arising from th
BackgroundThis is the Revenue's appeal against a Single Judge order dated 11.04....
Read MoreR.K. TRANSPORT & CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED v. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.
Supplier’s Failure to Deposit GST and State’s Duty to Act under Section 76(2).
BACKGROUNDThe petitioner had obtained commercial vehicle rental/hiring services ...
Read More