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

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3035

Whether appeal can be restored when there is a delay of 13 days in compliance with pre-deposit.

Case:DELTA INFORMATION SERVICE LTD. Vs COMMR. OF C. EX., CHANDIGARH

Citation:2015 (40) S.T.R. 39 (P & H)

Brief  Facts:The appellant is before High Court challenging order dated 10-6-2014 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) whereby his appeal has been dismissed for failure to comply with order of pre-deposit within the time granted by the Tribunal.

Appellant’s Contention: Counsel for the appellant submits that though it is true that the amount as directed by the Tribunal was deposited after a delay of 13 days and the appellant may be remiss in his duty to file an application for extension of time, but the error committed by the appellant may be condoned particularly after taking into consideration extenuating circumstances brought to the notice of the Tribunal and pleaded in the present appeal.
Counsel for the appellant further submits that copy of order dated 29-4-2014 was prepared by the registry of the Tribunal on 22-5-2014 and received by the appellant by post on 27-5-2014 i.e. the last date for depositing the amount as directed by the Tribunal. The appellant deposited the amount within two weeks from 27-5-2014. The conduct of the appellant is, therefore, neither culpable nor negligent and, therefore, the appeal may be allowed.

Respondent’s Contention: Counsel for the revenue submits that as adequate time was granted to the appellant, in the presence of his counsel, it was not necessary for the appellant to wait for a certified copy of the order. The delay in forwarding the copy to the appellant is a mere excuse and as admittedly there is a delay in complying with the order of pre-deposit, the appeal may be dismissed.

Reasoning of Judgement:A perusal of the facts reveals that the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal for failure to deposit the amount of pre-deposit within the time granted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide order dated 29-4-2014 directed the appellant to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 40,000/- within four weeks. A certified copy of the order was prepared on 22-5-2014 and received by the appellant on 27-5-2014. The last date for complying with the order of pre-deposit was 27-5-2014. The appellant deposited Rs. 40,000/- after a delay of 13 days.
The appellant obviously could not have complied with the order of pre-deposit but should have, in the fitness of things at least approached the Tribunal for extension of time. Be that as it may, the appellant was not at fault as copy of order dated 29-4-2014 was received on 27-5-2014 i.e. on the last date for pre-deposit. The only fault that can be found with the appellant was failure to file an application for extension of time. This, however, cannot deprive the appellant of his right to seek adjudication of his appeal on merits as he has deposited the amount demanded by the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, allowed, the impugned order dated 10-6-2014 is set aside and the appeal is restored to the Tribunal for adjudication afresh in accordance with law.

Decision:Appeal Allowed

Comment:The case is related to delay in complying with pre-deposit order of Tribunal. The assessee has deposited the amount after a delay of 13 days therefore Tribunal has passed the order against assessee.
Assessee has filed the appeal before High Court on the ground that the delay should be condone because they have complied with pre-deposit and also the order of Tribunal was received on the last date of compliance of pre-deposit.
The High court has set aside the order of Tribunal and held that the only fault that can be found with the appellant was failure to file an application for extension of time. This, however, cannot deprive the appellant of his right to seek adjudication of his appeal on merits as he has deposited the amount demanded by the Tribunal.
 

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