The Allahabad High Court allowed appeal filing before the GST Tribunal after its constitution. It held that appeals filed by June 30, 2026, must be accepted without limitation objections.
The judgment clarifies that subsequent departmental communications do not extend limitation periods. The appeal must be filed against the original order within statutory timelines.
The issue was rejection of a GST appeal for non-payment of pre-deposit. The Court held that the appellant must be given an opportunity to deposit and have the appeal decided on merits.
The issue involved penalty imposed for alleged GSTIN discrepancy in transit goods. The Court held that payment concludes proceedings but allowed appeal without further pre-deposit.
The Court held that failure to prove identity and source of creditors attracts Section 68. Such unexplained credits cannot be treated as business income or eligible for deduction under Sections 80-IA/80-IB.
The Court held that provisional attachment under Section 110(5) lapses after six months if not extended. It ruled that failure to pass a timely extension order renders the attachment invalid.
The issue involved recovery of input tax credit without initiating action against the supplier. The Court held that coercive recovery should be stayed, emphasizing that authorities must first proceed against the supplier.
The Court granted bail noting absence of direct evidence connecting the applicant to the alleged fraudulent firm. The decision highlights that mere allegations without supporting material are insufficient to deny bail.
The Court noted that a system exists to provide temporary GST IDs for aggrieved persons. No further directions were issued as the grievance had been resolved.
The Court directed authorities to reconsider the petitioner’s application under the scheme. It noted that a co-noticee had already received relief under the same proceedings.
