SRI DIGAMBAR SINGH BISHT vs CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAX AND CUSTOMS

UKHC010075672023

2026:UHC:7778

Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
SL.
Date
No.
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS

WPMS/1444/2023


Sri Govind Chandra Joshi --Petitioner
Versus
Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs &
Another --Respondents

With
WPMS/1924/2023
WPMS/1040/2023
WPMS/1929/2023

WPMS/1930/2023

Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.




Mr. Pavan Kumar Nath, Advocate, for
the petitioners.
Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate, for
the respondents.


(2) Since the issue involved in all these
writ petitions is identical, therefore, these are
being heard and decided together by this
common judgment. However, for brevity, facts
of Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1444 of 2023 alone
are being considered and discussed here.

(3) Petitioner is a civil contractor, who is
registered with Service Tax Department.
Aggrieved by an order passed by
Superintendent, Service Tax, Haldwani, under
Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994, petitioner
filed appeal before the Commissioner, Central
Goods and Services Tax (Appeals), Dehradun,
which was registered as Appeal No. 148 of
2022-23. Appeal, however, was dismissed on
the ground that the condition of pre-deposit,
as mentioned in Section 35F of Central Excise
Act, 1944, was not met. Thus feeling
aggrieved, petitioner has approached this
Court seeking the following reliefs:

UKHC010075672023

2026:UHC:7778

“(1) issue writ, order or direction, in the
nature of certiorari, setting aside the impugned Order-
in-Appeal bearing DIN-20230354AA000081808E dated
16-03-2023 passed by the Respondent No. 2
(Commissioner of Good and Service Tax-Appeals)
(Annexure 6);

(2) issue writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No 2 to
treat the pre-deposit-tax of Rs. 56,650/- deposited by
the Petitioner on 13-07-2022 as a valid mode of
payment in compliance of Section 35 F of the Central
Excise Act, 1944 and section 83 of the Finance Act
1994;

(3) issue writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 2 to
decide the Petitioner's Appeal No
62/ST/APPL/DDN/2022-23 on merits, after considering
the written submission already made; and/or issue any
other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper under the facts and
circumstance of the case.”

(4) Learned Counsel for the petitioner
submits that petitioner has deposited the
amount, which was required to deposit under
Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944,
however, due to ambiguity in law, the amount
was deposited in the GST Portal, instead of
portal belonging to Central Excise and Customs
and due to this inadvertent mistake, the
Appellate Authority refused to hear the appeal
filed by petitioner on merits and it was
dismissed only due to non-compliance of
provision contained in Section 35F of Central
Excise Act.

(5) Per contra, Mr. Shobhit Saharia
submits that as per circulars, issued by Central
Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC),
the amount of pre-deposit was to be deposited
through ICEGATE Portal of CBIC, however
petitioner allegedly deposited the said amount
through some other portal, which was not in
terms of circulars/notifications issued from
time to time. He, however, submits, based on
instructions, that the department has no
objection if petitioner is permitted to make the

UKHC010075672023

2026:UHC:7778

prescribed pre-deposit through ICEGATE Portal
and thereafter, if he moves an application
seeking restoration of appeal for rehearing on
merits, the request of petitioner for restoration
of appeal shall be considered sympathetically.
He further submits that for refund of the
amount deposited by petitioner through wrong
portal shall be considered separately upon
petitioner moving an application for such
refund, as per law.

(6) Written instruction, digitally signed
on 27.8.2026, produced in Court by Mr.
Shobhit Saharia, is taken on record.

(7) Writ petitions are, accordingly,
disposed of with liberty to petitioners to move
application for restoration of appeal before
Commissioner (Appeals), subject to petitioners
depositing the amount of pre-deposit through
ICEGATE Portal. If petitioners deposit the said
amount and move application for restoration of
appeal within four weeks from today, decision
thereupon shall be taken by Commissioner
(Appeals) within four weeks thereafter. As
regards refund of amount deposited by
petitioners through DRC-03, petitioners shall
be at liberty to move appropriate application
for refund of the said amount and decision on
such application, if made, shall be taken by the
competent authority, as per law.




(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

31.8.2026
Pr











PRABODH
KUMAR
Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aea b198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052D F6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR
Date: 2026.08.31 19:04:03 +05'30'

UKHC010075672023

2026:UHC:7778