TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Today I had an occasion to go through the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the Deputy Commissioner St & Ors. Versus Wingtech Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - 2025 (10) TMI 604 - SC Order which prompted me to write this article at once. It poses several questions which are to be answered by GST officials at Top Level immediately to avoid the occurrences of such flaws in future in the interest of justice to the common taxpayer.
It is the natural flow of GST Law that the proceedings start with issuance of SCN followed by adjudication after a reasonable time gap. Once an adjudication order is passed, law provides for a period of three months to go on appeal. Section 79 is warranted only after the expiry of three months from the date of adjudication order when the GST official ascertains that the required mandatory pre deposit of 10% of the disputed taxes are not paid and no appeal is preferred by the taxpayer.
The sequences of the events in the case of Deputy Commissioner St & Ors. Versus Wingtech Mobile Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. - 2025 (10) TMI 604 - SC Order are tabled for easy reference.
No | Date | Occurrence | Remarks |
1 | 02/08/2025 | Adjudication order | Demand of 245 Crores confirmed |
2 | 17/07/2025 | Provisional attachment |
|
3 | 19/08/2025 | Bank account attached | 170 Crores recovered |
4 | 03/09/2025 | High Court A P intervenes | Reasonable order passed |
5 | 06/10/2025 | SC Passes order | No interference with H C Order |
The following questions arise in the minds of a GST Professional.
- Whether the procedures connected with provisional attachments are correctly followed?
- What is the need for recovery proceedings when the time limit for first appeal is still open as on today?
- While there is upper limit of twenty crores under section 107 (6) (b) for pre deposit, why this aspect is not looked in to?
- On what basis the decision to file SLP was made when knowing pretty well that there are no merits?
- Is the GST law meant only for flouting by the tax officials?
- When an order is passed in incorrect manner, why no costs are imposed on the erring officials?
- Why the CBIC is a silent spectator on this aspect?
- Why the CBIC is not sensitized on loosing several SLPs before the Supreme Court?
- What was the need for a team of 8 learned legal professionals to appear, just to loose the case?
- If this is not tax terrorism, then what else is?
- Whether the recovery proceedings itself are JUSTIFIED in the instant case?
As GSTAT is in place and all the jurisdictional High Courts are most likely not going to entertain writ cases under GST any more, justification is needed for the common taxpayer from the tax administrators of our country immediately.