Barjinder Singh Kohli vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue, State Tax, Durgapur Charge And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the appeal solely on the ground of non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement. It reasoned that Section 107(6) of the 2017 Act, as it stood at the time of filing, did not mandate any pre-deposit for appeals against orders pertaining only to penalty and interest, where no tax was in dispute. The Court clarified that the substantive right to appeal cannot be affected by non-existent conditions. The Court also noted that a subsequent amendment to Section 107(6) in 2025, which mandated pre-deposit for penalty orders, was not applicable to the present case as it was enacted after the appeal was filed. Regarding the delay, the Court observed that the petitioner claimed to have filed an application for condonation of delay, which the Appellate Authority seemingly overlooked. Consequently, the Court remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application for condonation of delay. The Appellate Authority is to consider this application and, if satisfied, condone the delay and hear the appeal on merits without insisting on pre-deposit, given the appeal was filed before the relevant proviso to Section 107(6) came into effect.

Facts

The petitioner, Barjinder Singh Kohli, is challenging an order dated May 15, 2025, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017, and CGST Act, 2017. The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Authority on two grounds: delay in filing and non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit requirement. The petitioner's appeal against an adjudication order dated January 7, 2025, was filed on April 26, 2025, which was beyond the three-month period specified in Section 107(1) but within the condonable one-month period under Section 107(4). The petitioner argued that no pre-deposit was required as the adjudication order only determined interest and penalty, and the tax liability had already been paid. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal for late filing and non-payment of pre-deposit, issuing a show cause notice which the petitioner did not reply to.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the ground of delay in filing, without properly considering the petitioner's application for condonation of delay? 2. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the ground of non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement under Section 107(6) of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017, when the impugned order only demanded interest and penalty, and the tax liability had already been paid? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the appeal was filed within the condonable period and that an application for condonation of delay was indeed filed. Regarding the pre-deposit, the petitioner argued that Section 107(6) did not mandate any pre-deposit when the impugned order only involved interest and penalty, especially since the tax had already been paid via DRC-03 on March 12, 2021, and the adjudication order showed 'Nil' tax liability. They relied on the wording of Section 107(6) as it stood at the time of filing. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the State/Revenue, other than their role as respondents.