https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447597 Section 107(6)(b) of the CGST Act was construed to require pre-deposit of 10% only of the "remaining amount of tax in dispute" and not of the composite demand including interest, penalty, fine, or fee. Relying on the principle that statutory language is determinative of legislative intent and courts cannot supply omissions, the HC held that the legislature deliberately confined the pre-deposit to disputed tax, treating penalty, fine, fee and interest as consequential to tax determination. The appellate authority therefore lacked justification to insist on 10% deposit of tax plus fine equivalent to goods value, as this would defeat the statutory option where entire tax liability is disputed. The impugned pre-deposit direction was set aside and the petition was allowed. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 14:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447597 Section 107(6)(b) of the CGST Act was construed to require pre-deposit of 10% only of the "remaining amount of tax in dispute" and not of the composite demand including interest, penalty, fine, or fee. Relying on the principle that statutory language is determinative of legislative intent and courts cannot supply omissions, the HC held that the legislature deliberately confined the pre-deposit to disputed tax, treating penalty, fine, fee and interest as consequential to tax determination. The appellate authority therefore lacked justification to insist on 10% deposit of tax plus fine equivalent to goods value, as this would defeat the statutory option where entire tax liability is disputed. The impugned pre-deposit direction was set aside and the petition was allowed. Case-Laws GST Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447597