Punjab & Haryana High Court
For assesseeRemanded
Topic
First appeals: limitation, condonation of delay, pre-deposit and maintainability.
57 rulings found
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Where assessee's appeal was dismissed for non-payment of 10 percent pre- deposit despite entire disputed tax already deposited during investigation, such dismissal was unjustified and writ petition was allowed as relief confined to procedural ground, with remand to Appellate Authority for fresh consideration, without addressing merits of original dispute. GST: Where appeal against adjudication order was dismissed solely on ground that copy of impugned order filed was not self-certified, such defect was curable and opportunity should have been granted to cure it, hence straightway dismissal was unsustainable and appeal deserved consideration on merits after opportunity to remove deficiency
Delhi High Court
Where tax demand order was merely uploaded on GST Common Portal without separate service or acknowledgement, such upload alone did not amount to valid service and did not trigger limitation for appeal, thus petitioner was permitted to file statutory appeal within four weeks and appeal could not be rejected as time-barred on basis of portal upload
Delhi High Court
Where penalty-only SCNs were issued prior to introduction of pre-deposit requirement for appeals, such pre-deposit condition could not apply retrospectively and GSTAT must entertain appeals in penalty-only cases arising from such SCNs without insisting on pre-deposit, ensuring appellate right was unaffected by whether first or second appeal was involved
Calcutta High Court
Where petitioner filed appeal against adjudication order after delay due to serious illness of business manager, having paid mandatory pre-deposit and established sufficient cause, dismissal on limitation ground without considering circumstances was hyper-technical and not justified, thus, delay deserved to be condoned and appeal was to be restored for merit-based hearing
Calcutta High Court
Where statutory appeal was filed after mandatory pre-deposit but delayed due to serious illness of person entrusted with GST matters, supported by medical records, dismissing the appeal solely on limitation without considering sufficient cause was hyper-technical, and delay in filing appeal from date of communication deserved condonation with direction to admit appeal and decide on merits
Calcutta High Court
Where SCN and adjudication order were uploaded solely under 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab on portal without separate intimation, and appeal was dismissed on limitation grounds without a hearing on merits, such procedural lapse constituted violation of natural justice, thus quashing appellate order and directing appellate authority to admit appeal for hearing and decision on merits
Telangana High Court
Where petitioner company paid and reversed ITC under protest pursuant to adjudicating authority's demand, but appellate authority subsequently set aside original order and allowed appeal, refund officer could not reject refund claim on grounds of non-finality or proposed departmental appeal, as appellate order remained operative and binding until stayed or modified, making refund rejection unsustainable GST: Where petitioner, after demand against it was set aside in entirety on appeal, sought refund of amounts paid by filing RFD-01 with supporting documents, refund authority wrongly rejected refund citing lack of explicit refund direction, as statutory principles mandated consequential refund whenever original demand is quashed, requiring refund authority to process claim on merits under refund mechanism without re-examining demand issues GST: Where refund claim was rejected solely because of prospective departmental appeal and capitalization entries when no appeal was pending as on refund date, there was no hearing and no formed Commissioner opinion on adverse impact due to malfeasance or fraud, rejection was unsustainable since statutory prerequisites for withholding refund were not met and subsequent appeal did not cure these deficiencies
Allahabad High Court
Where a company was ordered to be wound up during pendency of four GST appeals and liquidator was appointed and informed appellate authority, but appeals were decided ex parte without notice or hearing to liquidator, violation of natural justice occurred, requiring ex parte appellate orders to be set aside for fresh decision after due notice and hearing to liquidator
Madras High Court
Where adjudication order confirmed tax, interest and penalty, and assessee paid tax and interest leaving only penalty unpaid, DRC-07 was issued solely for penalty, rejection of appeal for non-payment of 10 percent pre-deposit of penalty was unsustainable as proviso to Section 107(6) applies only where order demands penalty without any tax, thus appeal was to be restored for adjudication on merits
Delhi High Court
Where petitioner’s ITC in electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A, requested adjustment of blocked credit for pre-deposit against confirmed IGST demand was declined, since blocking does not constitute payment or appropriation towards an adjudicated demand and debit cannot occur until restriction is removed or modified, thus only unblocked ECL credit may be used for pre-deposit, not mandatorily cash ledger
Kerala High Court
Where assessee filed belated appeal invoking Notification No. 53/2023 allowing late appeals on payment of additional 2.5 percent but paid this amount after initial filing, rejection of appeal as time-barred without considering entitlement under notification or granting opportunity to cure payment defect was not justified, and appeal was required to be restored for reconsideration of notification eligibility
Rajasthan High Court
Where order-in-original was uploaded only on portal and petitioner became aware after recovery from Electronic Credit Ledger, resulting in 125 days delay in filing appeal under Section 107, delay was attributable to circumstances beyond control, so appeal was directed to be entertained and decided on merits if filed within prescribed time after this order
Madras High Court
Where electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A for alleged wrongful ITC and petitioner filed appeal with pre-deposit from cash ledger, deemed stay operated for recovery of balance, so no appropriation could be made from blocked credit ledger or cash ledger, though blocking under Rule 86A continued and unblocking request required consideration by authorities
Rajasthan High Court
Where petitioner challenged demand for alleged excess ITC and appeal delay resulted from illness of director and order was only uploaded on portal, refusal to condone delay and decide appeal on merits would cause grave prejudice, thus delay was condoned and Appellate Authority was directed to hear appeal on merits if filed within specified period after order upload
Madras High Court
Where assessee’s credit ledger was blocked under rule 86A pending appeal on wrongful ITC availment and statutory pre-deposit was made from electronic cash ledger, blocking under rule 86A remained provisional and capped at one year, deemed stay on recovery operated from appeal filing, prohibiting appropriation but not affecting ongoing blocking, thus unblocking request required consideration within rule 86A framework
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioner filed appeal beyond condonable period due to medical ailments supported by medical certificate and appeal was dismissed as time-barred, delay was satisfactorily explained, rejection order was set aside and appeal was restored for consideration on merits after affording hearing, keeping all contentions open
Bombay High Court
Where assessee’s refund appeal was dismissed by Appellate Authority solely for non-attendance without addressing merits or providing a speaking order, such non-speaking dismissal violated statutory mandate and principles of natural justice, warranting quashing of impugned order and restoration of appeal for merit-based adjudication
Bombay High Court
Where pre-deposit was made for appeal and First Appellate Authority dropped part of tax demand with no departmental appeal against that portion, petitioner was entitled to proportionate refund of pre-deposit for amount set aside, as insistence on finality for entire proceedings was erroneous and retention of such amount was unauthorized in law
Madras High Court
Where petitioner's electronic credit ledger was blocked under Rule 86A upon finding of bill trading by supplier, and petitioner sought to use blocked ITC for appellate pre-deposit under Section 49(4) read with Section 107, use of credit ledger for pre-deposit is ordinarily permitted but is barred when credit stands blocked, as Section 49(4) does not confer absolute right to such use during blockage
Rajasthan High Court
Where statutory GST appeal was dismissed as time barred and delay in filing was due to medical circumstances beyond control, writ jurisdiction could be invoked in such exceptional cases to advance justice, warranting condonation of delay so that appeal could be heard on merits, subject to statutory deposit requirements and late fee payments