Madras HC Restores GST Appeals Subject to 25% Pre-Deposit

SMP Engineers Electricals Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) (Madras High Court)

SMP Engineers Electricals Pvt Ltd filed three writ petitions before the Madras High Court challenging GST assessment orders for the years 2017–18 and 2018–19, dated 3 February 2025 and 30 April 2025, under the CGST/TNGST Acts. The petitioner sought rectification under Section 161 of the GST enactments and filed appeals before the Appellate Authority. For W.P.Nos. 40773 and 40788 of 2025, rectification applications were filed in February 2025 and rejected in March 2025, while appeals were filed on 11 September 2025 and rejected on 17 September 2025. For W.P.No.40785 of 2025, the appeal was initially filed on 28 August 2024 without pre-deposit and rejected on 23 March 2025, with a subsequent appeal filed on 16 September 2025 also rejected as time-barred.

The Court observed that under established law, an appeal filed without the mandatory pre-deposit is not recognized in law. Consequently, the initial rejection of the appeal and the subsequent rejection due to limitation were legally valid. However, because the first appeal was not valid in law, the bar of res judicata did not apply to the second appeal, which was filed beyond the condonable period.

The Court clarified that failure to comply with these stipulations will allow the Appellate Authority to recover the disputed tax as if the writ petitions had been dismissed in limine. Proper notice must be given to the petitioner before any such final order is passed. The writ petitions were disposed of accordingly, and connected writ miscellaneous petitions were closed. No costs were awarded.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, all the three writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order at the time of admission itself.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. In these writ petitions, the petitioner has challenged the following assessment orders.

5. The petitioner has attempted to assail the same, both under Section 161 of the respective GST enactments by filing rectification applications, as well as by filing appeals before the Appellate Authority. The details of the respective Assessment Orders and the rectification applications filed are captured in the table below:

6. A reading of the above table indicates that the petitioner had approached the Appellate authority against the Assessment Orders dated

7. The appeals were filed beyond the condonable period of limitation, which came to be rejected on 17.09.2025 under two separate orders.

8. Under similar circumstances, this Court has intervened and disposed of writ petitions by restoring appeals before the Appellate Authority, subject to the assessee depositing 25% of the disputed tax.

9. It is admitted that the petitioner has not deposited any amount so far, though the petitioner had filed appeals on 11.09.2025 against the respective assessment orders dated 03.02.2025.

10. Under these circumstances, there shall be a direction to the petitioner to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for the Appellate authority to entertain the appeals and to dispose of the same on merits.

11. As far as the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 (W.P.No.40785 of 2025) is concerned, the petitioner had filed the appeal initially on 28.08.2024 without pre-deposit, and therefore the Appellate Authority, by order dated

12. The law on the subject is well-settled that an appeal without the mandatory pre-deposit is not an appeal in the eye of law. Therefore, the rejection of the appeal at the first instance by the Appellate Authority on 23.03.2025 is strictly in accordance with the settled legal position. Likewise, rejection of the subsequent appeal filed on 16.09.2025 as time-barred is also correct and in line with the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur and others, (2008) 3 SCC 70 and in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Vs. Hongo India Private Limited and another, (2009) 5 SCC 791 and Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada and others Vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited, 2020 SCC Online SC 440.

13. Since the earlier appeal filed on 28.08.2024 came to be dismissed on 23.03.2025 and was not an appeal in the eye of law, the bar of res judicata would not apply to the second appeal filed on 16.09.2025. However, as the second appeal has been filed beyond the condonable period of limitation, the

14. Therefore, taking note of the submissions and the fact that the petitioner seeks to contest the impugned order dated 30.04.2024, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to restore the appeal before the Appellate Authority, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash from the Petitioner’s Electronic Cash Register within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

15. In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the 1st Respondent shall proceed to pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (3) months of such reply/pre-deposit. Subject to the Petitioner complying with the above stipulations, if any attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner shall also stand automatically raised/vacated.

16. In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the 1st Respondent is at liberty to proceed against the Petitioner to recover the tax in accordance with law as if this Writ Petition was dismissed in limine today.

17. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the 1^st Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.

18. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.