Held: The petitioners had preferred an appeal challenging the said order. Although, the learned advocate for the petitioners insists that the appellate authority was duty bound to dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned order having regard to the provisions contained in Section 107(12) of the said Act, I however, find that in terms of the provisions contained in Section 107(6) of the said Act, the appellate authority could not have accepted the appeal filed by the petitioner unless, the petitioner no.1 who was the appellant had paid the amount of tax, interest, fine and penalty arising from the impugned order as admitted by him and a sum equal to 10% of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising out of the order (subject to maximum of 25 crores of rupees) in relation to which the appeal has been filed. The language of Section 107(6) of the said Act is distinct and clear and mandates that no appeal shall be filed under sub-Section 1 unless the appellant has paid the amount as indicated hereinabove.  If the petitioner did not comply with the above directive for mandatory pre-deposit, there is no scope for the appellate authority to entertain the appeal. Having regard thereto, I find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed without any order as to costs.

Held - As per section 107(6) of the CGST Act, 2017, no appeal shall be filed unless the Appellant has paid admitted tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty in full and a sum equal to 10% of the amount of tax in dispute in relation to which the appeal has been filed. In our view, the Commissioner (Appeal) was not justifed in deciding the matter on merits after having come to a conclusion that the appeal is to be rejected on the ground of no proof of pre-deposit, failure to file certifed copy of the order and the appeal not having been authenticated as per rule 26(2)(a) of the CGST Rules. If the appeal is rejected on this ground, then in our view any adjudication on merits is not permissible by the Appellate Authority and would be without jurisdiction. In view of above, we pass the following order:- (a) The Order in Appeal dated 17th June 2022 is set aside and restored to the file of the Commissioner (Appeal). (b) Commissioner (Appeal) will issue a defect memo to the Petitioner pointing out the procedural defect in the appeal and would give adequate opportunity for rectifying the same.

Held: On perusal of the impugned order dated 05.12.2024 (paragraph-6), it is revealed that the Appellate Authority has taken note of furnishing documents along with appeal and he found that no evidence was available on record with regard to pre-deposit. It is required to be complied with as per sub-section (6) of Section 107 of the CGST Act. Except the said pre-deposit the appeal was otherwise defect-free. It is undeniable that the Appellate Authority proceeded to hear the matter on merit having ignored such a statutory requirement. However, it is no contested by the learned Senior Standing Counsel that the appeal was heard on merit and no intimation was given to the Petitioner with regard to non-compliance of requirements under subsection (6) of Section 107.  This Court, therefore, feels it expedient to observe that when the appeal is admitted and the Appellate Authority is proceeded to hear the matter on merit, the Office of the Appellate Authority should have brought to the notice of the Petitioner with regard to defect in filing of appeal much prior to issue of notice of hearing. Having not done so, the Appellate Authority proceeded to hear the matter on merit. Therefore, the Petitioner was not afforded proper opportunity. Having not intimated the Petitioner with regard to defect, even though it is admitted that the appeal was admitted for hearing due to inadvertence, there is violation of principles of natural justice. This Court sets aside the impugned order dated 05.12.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, GST (Appeals) and direct the Petitioner to deposit the requirement under Section 107(6) of the CGST Act within five days hence.