TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
27 Oct 2026 
This is the third and concluding part and based on a sample size of 30, we are examining the outcome of the GSTAT orders.
Year is 2026 for Columns 2 and 3
The operative portion in brief.
| No | Order in brief |
| 1 | The entire matter is remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority (Proper Officer) for a fresh, de novo adjudication and proper verification in accordance with the law. The present Appeal is accordingly allowed by way of remand. The entire matter is remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority (Proper Officer) for a fresh, de novo adjudication and proper verification in accordance with the law. The present Appeal is accordingly allowed by way of remand. |
| 2 | The appeals are allowed by way of remand to the adjudicating authority. |
| 3 | The appeal is accordingly partly allowed in the above terms. |
| 4 | For the reasons stated above, we hold that this departmental appeal involves a disputed penalty of Rs. 2,71,350, which is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000. The Revenue has failed to establish any recognised exception. The appeal therefore does not meet the conditions governing its admission and maintainability before this Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed at the threshold on the ground of the prescribed monetary limit and the Revenue's failure to establish an applicable exception. |
| 5 | For the reasons stated above, we hold that this departmental appeal involves a disputed a penalty of Rs. 3,35,286 which is below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000. The Revenue has failed to establish any recognised exception. The appeal therefore does not meet the conditions governing its admission and maintainability before this Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed at the threshold on the ground of the prescribed monetary limit and the Revenue's failure to establish an applicable exception. |
| 6 | Accordingly, the appeal deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed, along with all consequential reliefs to which the appellant may be entitled in accordance with law. |
| 7 | The appeal no. APL/1/ALB/2026 is allowed |
| 8 | For the reasons discussed above, I hold that the impugned Order-in-Appeal Nos. VIZ-GST-000-APP- 065 TO 066-21-22 43/VSK/2026 & 44/VSK/2026 dated 31-3-2022 cannot be sustained insofar as it rejects the appellant's refund claim solely on the ground of limitation. The appeal is accordingly allowed by setting aside the impugned order and directing consequential action in the limited manner indicated hereinabove. |
| 9 | (a) The order-in-appeal No. 172/JC/Central Tax/Appeal-II/Delhi/2024-25 dated 03.07.2024 is confirmed. (b) The Department's appeal is dismissed. |
| 10 | The appeal is allowed. The order-in-appeal No: APL/GST-83/2021-22 dated 23.03.2023 is set-aside with consequential relief. |
Conclusion: A glass of milk is kept before you with 50% milk. It all depends on how you look at it. Be happy that we have at least half of the glass milk rather than no milk at all. This is what exactly comparable with GSTAT in place at least during 2026. The GST law is undoubtedly an excellent piece of legislation and the legislature has drafted the law in such a manner that the Government should get their share of GST exactly in line with the provisions of law which got approved in both the houses of Parliament and got the ascent from the President of India. It is only due to the pressure by senior officials on adjudicating authorities that this year collection must improve by prescribed percentage over last year, the proper officer often raises unjustifiable demands and the taxpayer ends up in paying even a wrong demand as he has to focus on the challenges in running the business in a profitable manner, where even survival is difficult. Be that as it may, in a similar manner in which the agriculturist in our country are continuing to do cultivation despite knowing that it yields either no income or sometimes even a loss when flood or water shortage is there, our businessmen continue to do the business for the survival. There need not be any trade facilitation but the GST law should not be a harassment.
The GSTAT through the above 30 orders justified the need of the Tribunal as clarity is coming out on the interpretation of several sections such as 74, 129, 130 etc. This is only a begging as we have only 529 final orders of the Tribunal whereas there are 10,071 admitted cases and around 96,000 e appeals before the GSTAT. The period up to 31/12/2026 are crucial as it is expected that more and more issues are likely to be settled by end of the year 2026.
Before parting: The trend is that in general taxpayers appeals are either allowed in full or at least partly whereas Revenue appeals are generally dismissed. However, this trend is applicable to an extent of 75% to 80% only, as we come across cases of taxpayer appeal being dismissed as well as Revenue appeal being allowed.
Key take away: So far taxes are concerned, we have CESTAT as well as ITAT in place for several decades. In a majority of cases, especially when the stake involved is high, the taxpayer gets relief only at Tribunal. This concept is fully applicable for GST as well. It is appealed to all stakeholders to note there is a change in the trend on GST. The 56th as well as 57th GST Council meeting approved several proposals which are targeting ease of doing business as well as quality adjudication. This must be categorically understood very clearly by all officers who pass OIO as well as OIA.
It is appealed to all the taxpayers that they should not be carried away by the threat of Proper Officer and must obtain suitable professional advice appropriately.