Facts of the Case:

In this case, the petitioner challenged the Order-in-Appeal whereby the Commissioner (CGST) confirmed part of the demand raised in the Order-in-Original along with interest and penalty. Originally, the demand raised was approximately ₹2.38 crores. At the first appellate stage, the petitioner had deposited ₹23,85,182/- as pre-deposit. The Appellate Authority substantially reduced the demand to approximately ₹40 lakhs. Though a statutory remedy of appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) was available, the Tribunal was not fully functional. Therefore, the petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226.

The petitioner contended that since the revised demand was ₹40 lakhs, 20% would be approximately ₹8 lakhs, but she had already deposited ₹23.85 lakhs at the first appellate stage which is far exceeding the statutory requirement.

Issue:

Whether the petitioner is required to make any additional pre-deposit for filing appeal before the GSTAT when the earlier pre-deposit already exceeds 20% of the revised demand?

Held that:

The Court noted that the petitioner had already deposited ₹23.85 lakhs at the first appellate stage, which far exceeded 20% of the reduced demand (₹40 lakhs), the Court accepted the petitioner’s contention that no additional pre-deposit could be insisted upon for filing appeal before the GSTAT.

The Court further directed that if the petitioner files the appeal before the GSTAT within four weeks, the Tribunal shall entertain and decide the appeal on merits without raising objections regarding limitation, considering that the petitioner had been bona fide pursuing the remedy before the High Court and the Tribunal was not fully functional. In the event the electronic filing system does not accept the appeal, the petitioner was permitted to file the appeal in physical format, and the Tribunal was directed to accept the same without insisting on any fresh pre-deposit. All issues on merits were left open for adjudication by the Tribunal.

Case Name: M/s. Ashirwad Food Industries Versus Union of India, through the Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi, Additional Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi, Additional Commissioner (Audit), CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi. dated 09.02.2026

To read the complete judgement 2026 Taxo.online 330