Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST Update No 269 on right of filing appeal after voluntary payment of GST/penalty

GST Update No 269 on right of filing appeal after voluntary payment of GST/penalty
It is well known that filing of appeal by the taxpayer is statutory and substantive right wherein intention of legislation is to grant relief to the aggrieved. Yet, the revenue authorities time and again harass the taxpayers by not admitting and deciding the appeal filed by the taxpayers. One case on similar lines was recently reported before the hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of M/S HINDUSTAN STEEL AND CEMENT [W.P. NO. 17454 OF 2022] wherein the departmental authorities opined that all the proceedings stand concluded and no further appeal can be filed by taxpayer in case any payment is made in accordance with the provisions of Section 129(1)(a) of CGST Act, 2017. The analysis of the decision is subject matter of discussion of our present update. The petitioner opted to make payment in terms of provisions of Section 129(1)(a) of CGST Act, 2017 to release the seized goods/conveyance. On payment of the same, the goods and the conveyance were released by issuing Form GST MOV-05 and an order was issued under Form MOV-09. However, a summary order was not issued in DRC07. Consequently, no appeal could be filed under Section 107 of CGST Act, 2017. It was submitted that as per Section 129 of the Act and Circular No. 41/15/2018-GST dated 13.04.2018, the order in Form MOV-09 should be accompanied by Summary order under DRC-07. Without this, no appeal can be filed since system accepts an appeal only if summary order in DRC-07 is issued. The Counsel of revenue argued that in case assessee opts to pay tax and penalty under Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017, the proceedings are deemed to be concluded. It was further contended that the payment is made voluntarily in DRC-03 by the taxpayer and thus, cannot be refunded back. Further, on payment the entire proceedings should be treated as concluded. Reference was drawn to CA. PRADEEP JAIN ??www.capradeepjain.com??pradeep@capradeepjain.com??5 Rule 142 of CGST Rules, 2017 wherein the concerned person seeks to continue the proceedings by opting a bank guarantee under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 meaning thereby that the proceedings cannot be deemed t be concluded. It was argued that no proceedings under DRC-07 can be initiated if in case payment is made voluntarily. The provisions of Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 do not make a distinction between the persons who opt to provide security and who opts to make payment under Section 129 of the Act. The Court held that whether the aggrieved chooses to make payment under Section 129 of the Act or provide security in terms of Section 129 of the Act, the officer detaining or seizing goods or conveyance has to issue a notice specifying tax and penalty. Therefore, the responsibility of concerned officer to issue and upload the summary order in DRC-07 continues. It was stated that the proceedings can be challenged by the concerned taxpayer if demand is illegally raised on him. Failing this will result into violation of Article 265 of the Constitution of India. Further, appeal can be preferred within a period of 3 months from the date on which such order or decision is communicated to the aggrieved person. It was therefore held that the payment of tax and penalty under Section 129 of the Act does not deprives the right of assessee to file an appeal. The fact that the system does not generate a demand or contemplates filing of appeal without demand does not means that the intention of the legislature was different. It was directed to the SGST department to issue an appropriate Circular in this respect to avoid any future litigations on the subject matter. The above decision is a welcoming initiative wherein the already settled subject matter is upheld that the right of filing appeal is statutory right of the assessee which cannot be deprived on frivolous grounds. The revenue authorities cannot refrain from issuing an order even if the tax amount along with interest and penalty stands deposited by the taxpayer voluntarily as without issuance of order, the right of appeal of the taxpayer is being compromised which is not the intention of the legislature. It is hoped that the revenue authorities proactively follow the settled principles of law so as to avoid any unwanted litigations in the future.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com