Maa Kalyani Electrical Vs Union of India (Jharkhand High Court)
The writ petition, Maa Kalyani Electrical Vs Union of India, before the Jharkhand High Court addressed the issue of whether an appellate authority becomes “functus officio”—a term meaning “having discharged one’s duty”—when it dismisses an appeal not on its merits, but solely on the procedural ground of failure to make a mandatory pre-deposit. The court ultimately ruled that the doctrine of functus officio was inapplicable in the specific facts of the case, setting aside the second rejection and restoring the appeal.
Background and Initial Rejection
The petitioner, Maa Kalyani Electrical, was aggrieved by an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CGST & Central Excise) and subsequently filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The core of the petitioner’s initial appeal was that the service tax liability had been discharged, with interest, before the issuance of a show-cause notice, and they were not contesting the tax liability itself.
However, the petitioner failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 (read with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 83 of the Act ibid, as cited in the order) to make a pre-deposit of 7.5% of the duty amount before filing the appeal.
