https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775062 The Bombay HC set aside the Appellate Authority's order dismissing petitioner's appeal for non-compliance with Section 107(6) CGST Act's pre-deposit requirement. The Authority rejected petitioner's use of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the 10% pre-deposit without providing notice or hearing, violating natural justice principles. The HC noted that the Bombay HC had previously held in Oasis Realty that ITC could be utilized for pre-deposits, contrary to the Patna HC's decision in Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. The Appellate Authority improperly ignored its jurisdictional HC's precedent and followed the Patna HC ruling, which had been stayed by the SC. The HC emphasized that the Authority should have given notice before non-suiting the petitioner on pre-deposit non-compliance grounds. The appeal was restored to the Appellate Authority's file for fresh consideration. en-us Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jul 2025 08:22:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775062 The Bombay HC set aside the Appellate Authority's order dismissing petitioner's appeal for non-compliance with Section 107(6) CGST Act's pre-deposit requirement. The Authority rejected petitioner's use of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the 10% pre-deposit without providing notice or hearing, violating natural justice principles. The HC noted that the Bombay HC had previously held in Oasis Realty that ITC could be utilized for pre-deposits, contrary to the Patna HC's decision in Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. The Appellate Authority improperly ignored its jurisdictional HC's precedent and followed the Patna HC ruling, which had been stayed by the SC. The HC emphasized that the Authority should have given notice before non-suiting the petitioner on pre-deposit non-compliance grounds. The appeal was restored to the Appellate Authority's file for fresh consideration. Case-Laws GST Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775062