The judgment affirms the procedure for appealing decisions related to penalties under tax law, highlighting the need for compliance with statutory provisions for an effective appeal.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner suffered an order of penalty under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act , 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’). The appeal filed against this order has been rejected by the first appellate authority. Against the afore order, the petitioner has a remedy of further appeal under Section 112 of the Act. However, the petitioner has approached this Court contending that the Tribunal u/s 112 has not been constituted till date.

2. Heard, S.Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Smt. Jasmine, the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. This Court, noticing that the petitioner had furnished a bank guarantee for the amount covered by the order of penalty referred to above, had directed the coercive proceedings as well as the realization of the bank guarantee to be kept in abeyance.

4. However, this Court notices that the Tribunal under the Act has already been constituted and appeals can be instituted by the petitioner on or before 30.06.2026. Therefore, I am of the opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of as under;

i. The petitioner to file an appeal under the provisions of Section 112 of the Act against the impugned first appellate order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

ii. Insofar as the provisions of Section 112 of the Act requires satisfaction of 20% of the disputed amount for entertaining the appeal, the petitioner to satisfy the afore stipulation within a period of six weeks from today. If such amount is being satisfied by the petitioner, needless to say that realisation of the balance amount will remain stayed till final disposal of the appeal.

Sd/-