This Tax Alert summarizes a recent ruling of the Delhi High Court (HC)[1] on whether the newly introduced pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal against penalty-only order applies where the show cause notice (SCN) was issued before 1 October 2025, while the adjudication order was passed thereafter.
The key observations of the HC are:
- The right of appeal is a
substantive right which once vested, cannot be taken away, impaired or
subjected to a more onerous condition unless the legislature manifests
such an intention expressly or by necessary intendment.
- This right arises when the lis (legal dispute)
begins and is governed by the provisions that exist on that date.
- In tax adjudication, the
dispute begins when Department issues show cause notice (SCN) asserting
liability and requiring the taxpayer to respond, and not when the
adjudication order is passed or the appeal is filed.
- On the date of the SCN in the
present case, the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 did not provide
for any pre-deposit for filing an appeal against penalty-only order under
Section 122(1A).
- Since the amended proviso
introduced a new and more onerous pre-deposit condition, it could not
apply to proceedings already initiated before 1 October 2025 in the
absence of express language or necessary implication to that effect.
Basis above, HC held that the
pre-deposit requirement for filing appeals against penalty-only orders would
not apply to cases where SCN was issued prior to 1 October 2025 and directed
the appellate authority to entertain the appeals without insisting on payment
of the same.
Comments:
- Recently, Hyderabad GSTAT
[2026-VIL-45-GSTAT-HYD] held that the pre-deposit requirement under the
proviso to Section 112(8), introduced from 1 October 2025 for appeals
before the GSTAT against penalty-only orders, does not apply where the
SCN, Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal were all issued before that
date.
- With effect from 1 October
2025, the pre-deposit percentage and monetary limits for appeals involving
disputed tax were also amended. The impact of this ruling may also need to
be examined in such cases where proceedings were initiated before the
amendment, but the order was passed or appeal was filed after that date.
- This ruling may have wider
relevance beyond the specific issue of pre-deposit. It reinforces the
principle that where a substantive right has already vested before an
amendment, any subsequent amendment introducing new conditions or
procedural requirements may not ordinarily apply to subsequent steps in
that proceeding.
No comments:
Post a Comment