Navin Road Lines Vs Assistant Registrar Customs Excise And Service Tax (Delhi High Court)
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging an order dated 8 January 2025 issued by the Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The dispute concerns the Tribunal’s refusal to entertain the petitioner’s appeal on the basis that the required pre-deposit had not been made correctly. Although the petitioner had deposited the amount, it was paid under the “Excise Head” instead of the designated category due to issues arising from the non-functional Service Tax portal following the migration to the GST regime.
The respondent was asked on 28 April 2025 to seek instructions regarding the matter, but no counter affidavit was filed. Meanwhile, the High Court had recently dealt with an identical issue in W.P.(C) 17236/2025 (M/s J.M.D. Enterprises v. CESTAT), where the Court held that deposits made under the Central Excise head should be recognised as valid pre-deposit for filing appeals before CESTAT. The Court reasoned that the taxpayer had no alternative because of the service tax portal’s non-functionality and clarified that once the government receives the money, the amount reaches the exchequer and need not be deposited again. In that earlier ruling, the High Court directed the Tribunal to hear the appeal on merits while allowing the excise deposit to qualify as the statutory pre-deposit.
