The GST Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh sent a cooperative society’s case back to the first appellate authority, which had decided neither its appeal on the demand nor its appeal against rejection of rectification on merits.
An appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act must be disposed of by an order under Section 107(11) that confirms, modifies or annuls the order challenged. It cannot be dismissed simply because the taxpayer has also filed a separate appeal against the original demand [The Dangarh MP Cass Ltd. v. State Tax Officer-cum-Proper Officer & Ors., 2026-juristway.com-3204-GSTAT(Chandigarh)-GST].
The appeal was heard by Jatinder Pal Singh, Member (Judicial), and Pradeep Kumar Goel, Member (Technical).
The appellant, a multipurpose cooperative agricultural service society in Barnala, Punjab, received a DRC‑01A intimation on 2 May 2024 for FY 2019-20 under Section 73(5). It concerned non-reversal of ITC on exempt supplies and a GSTR‑1 versus GSTR‑9 difference. The society says it replied on 22 May 2024 that its exempt turnover of ₹22,76,367 was cattle feed bought at a 0% rate with no ITC.
An SCN was issued on 28 May 2024. The order dated 30 Aug 2024 raised a demand of ₹1,96,466, made up of tax of ₹93,606, interest of ₹82,860 and a penalty of ₹20,000. The society’s application for rectification under Section 161, filed on 22 Nov 2024, was rejected on 5 Jun 2025 because no reply to the DRC‑01 had been filed.
The society then had two appeals before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala: one against the demand order and one against the rejection of rectification. The appellate authority recorded that both were being taken up together, but then dismissed a single appeal, stating: “The present appeal therefore cannot be entertained, as it is multiplicity of litigation on the same issue.”
The Tribunal held that, having taken both appeals up together, the appellate authority should have passed a suitable order under Section 107(11) in each. The impugned order contained no finding at all on the appeal against the demand, so the Tribunal could not examine the merits of the tax, interest and penalty in the present appeal.
The Tribunal also held that dismissing the rectification appeal merely on the ground of multiplicity of litigation was an error. The appellate authority was bound to deal with the principal grounds raised against the rejection of rectification.
The impugned order was quashed and the matter sent back to the appellate authority. It must pass fresh orders in both appeals, dealing with the society’s grounds on the demand and on the rectification, after granting a personal hearing.
2026-juristway.com-3204-GSTAT(Chandigarh)-GST
