Judgment
2026:HHC:30664 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 12453 of 2026 Date of decision: 27.07.2026 _____________________________________________________________________________ Deepak Kumar
...Petitioner.
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr.
…Respondents.
____________________________________________________________________________
Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 _____________________________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner.
Ms. Nazuk Singhal, Advocate.
For the Respondents:
Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General.
__________________________________________________________ Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Notice. Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General, Advocate, appears, waives and accepts service of notice on behalf of respondents-State.
2.
Petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of DRC- 07 final order dated 21.06.2025, passed by competent authority under 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2026:HHC:30664 CWP No. 12453 of 2026 Section 74 of GST Act, whereby additional demand of Rs. 28,54,142/- has been held to be liability to be paid by the petitioner.
3.
The impugned order is an appealable order under Section 107 of GST Act and the petitioner had alternative efficacious remedy, but it did not do so, rather present petition has also been filed at a belated stage. According to petitioner, tax liability is only about Rs. 12,00,000/- and remaining component is amount of interest and penalty.
4.
Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record instructions dated 24.07.2026 with submission that though tax amount is about Rs. 12,00,000/-, but for the delayed payment and continuation of the business after cancellation of registration certificate, petitioner has become liable to pay interest and penalty and in given conduct of petitioner, penalty has been increased from 25% to 100% and, therefore, he has justified the additional demand of Rs. 28,54,142/-.
5.
Admittedly, petitioner has failed to prefer appeal within limitation period.
6.
However, after hearing the parties, petitioner is permitted to file appeal under Section 107 of GST Act, subject to deposit of 50% of the amount demanded, i.e., Rs. 14,27,071/- with the department/authority within 30 days from today. The deposit shall be subject to final outcome of the appeal.
3 2026:HHC:30664 CWP No. 12453 of 2026 7.
Appellate authority is also directed to entertain the appeal proposed to be preferred by the petitioner within 30 days from today and to decide the same on its own merits instead of dismissing it as a time barred appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months after filing of the appeal.
8.
Appellate authority is also directed to consider the prayer of the petitioner to release bank account of the petitioner, after depositing of aforesaid amount, during pendency of the appeal, without being influenced by this order but on merits of the plea.
Petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, in aforesaid terms.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
Judge.
(Ranjan Sharma), Judge.
27th July, 2026 (Susheel)