Sourav Ganguly’s GST Appeal Reinstated: Calcutta HC Terms Further Pre-Deposit Demand a ‘Travesty of Justice’ After Excess Amount Already Recovered [Read Order]
The Court set aside the rejection order. It directed that petitioner be treated as having complied with the scheme’s payment requirement and ordered the appellate authority to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits within 12 weeks
![Sourav Ganguly’s GST Appeal Reinstated: Calcutta HC Terms Further Pre-Deposit Demand a ‘Travesty of Justice’ After Excess Amount Already Recovered [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/08/10/2075087-gangulys-gst-appeal-reinstated-gst-appeal-taxscan.webp "Sourav Ganguly’s GST Appeal Reinstated: Calcutta HC Terms Further Pre-Deposit Demand a ‘Travesty of Justice’ After Excess Amount Already Recovered [Read Order]")
The Calcutta High Court has restored former cricketer Sourav Ganguly’s GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) appeal, quashing the appellate authority’s order dated 30 July 2024 that had rejected the appeal for alleged non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements under the State’s GST Amnesty Scheme. Under the scheme notified on 2 November 2023, taxpayers were permitted to...
The Calcutta High Court has restored former cricketer Sourav Ganguly’s GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) appeal, quashing the appellate authority’s order dated 30 July 2024 that had rejected the appeal for alleged non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements under the State’s GST Amnesty Scheme.
Under the scheme notified on 2 November 2023, taxpayers were permitted to maintain appeals against orders passed on or before 31 March 2023 under Sections 73 or 74 of the WBGST/CGST Act, provided they filed the appeal by 31 January 2024 and paid 12.5% of the disputed tax, with at least 20% of that amount through the electronic cash ledger.
Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury noted that while the appellate authority had stated short payment of pre-deposit as the reason for rejection, the State’s counsel admitted that ₹7,40,661 had already been recovered from Ganguly in May 2023 an amount exceeding the required 12.5% threshold.
Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here
The Court held that insisting on further payment in such circumstances would be a “travesty of justice.”
The Court set aside the rejection order. It directed that petitioner be treated as having complied with the scheme’s payment requirement and ordered the appellate authority to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits within 12 weeks.
“I am of the view that the rejection of the appeal by order dated 30th July, 2024 was not proper as directing the petitioner to make further payment would be travesty of justice and as such while restoring the appeal by setting aside the order dated 30th July, 2024 by treating the petitioner to be in deemed compliance of the payment in terms of the Amnesty Scheme to the extent of 12.5%, I direct the appellate authority to here out and dispose of the appeal on merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within 12 weeks from the date of communication of this order”, said the bench.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
