REDDY VEERANNA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. v. APPEAL-I COMMISSIONER & ORS.
BACKGROUND
The appeal arose from an order imposing penalties under Sections 122 and 125 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act. The Registry raised the issue of statutory pre-deposit for admission of the appeal.
The SCN, original adjudication order and appellate order had all been issued before 01.10.2025, when the Finance Act, 2025 amendment introducing the additional pre-deposit for penalty-only orders came into force.
COURT OBSERVATION
The Tribunal noted that the amended proviso to Section 112(8) became effective only from 01.10.2025 and did not indicate retrospective application. Since the impugned appellate order was issued before the amendment, the Tribunal held that the amended pre-deposit condition could not be imposed on the appeal.
FINAL VERDICT
The Tribunal held that no pre-deposit was required under Section 112 for the present appeal. It clarified that the order would not prejudice the merits and that, if at the final hearing the Tribunal concluded that the amended pre-deposit provision was applicable, the appellant would have to comply with that requirement. Notice was issued and the matter was directed to be listed after four weeks.
CASE REFERRED BY COURT
Barjinder Singh Kohli v. Assistant Commissioner & Others — Calcutta High Court — 03.11.2025. The Tribunal held that the decision squarely covered the issue of pre-deposit in a penalty-only matter where the proceedings commenced before 01.10.2025.
Other Case Law
Cargotec India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
Whether refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on export of IT Software Services can be denied on the grounds of (i) services rendered from unregistered premises, and (ii) absence of nexus between input services a
BACKGROUND The appellant, a 100% Export Oriented Unit operating under the S...
Read MoreState of Karnataka v. Tallam Apparels
Disallowance of Input Tax Credit on allegation of non-genuine transactions and non-payment of tax by selling dealer under VAT (Sections involved: Section 70(1), Section 39(1), and relevant provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003)
Facts :The assessee, a registered dealer dealing in garments, claimed input tax ...
Read MoreNoordeen Enterprises & MNS Enterprises vs. Additional Director General, DGGI & Additional Commissioner of CGST, South Commissionerate
Validity of letters issued by DGGI to customers of the petitioner-taxpayers, directing those customers to remit amounts payable to the petitioners directly to the GST authorities — issued at a stage when no order-in-original determining tax liability ha
BACKGROUNDThe petitioners are suppliers of goods. During the course of investiga...
Read More