Deposit Under Protest Not Admission of GST Liability | HC
- Blog|News|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 4 July, 2025
Latest from Taxmann
Case Details: Shyama Power India Ltd. vs. State of H. P. - [2025] 175 taxmann.com 926 (Himachal Pradesh)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Tarlok Singh Chauhan & Sushil Kukreja, JJ.
-
Rakesh Sharma & Ms Sakshi Gautam, Advs. for the Petitioner.
-
Anup Rattan, A.G., Ramakant Sharma, Navlesh Verma, Ms Sharmila Patial, Sushant Keprate, Addl. A. Gs., I. N. Mehta, Y. W. Chauhan, Sr. Addl. A.Gs. & Raj Negi, Dy. A.G. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged an order passed under section 74 of the CGST Act which imposed interest and penalty on the ground of alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit (ITC). It was submitted that a portion of the ITC had been reversed solely under protest, and not as an admission of liability, due to continuous pressure exerted by the jurisdictional officer under GST.
The petitioner further contended that no independent investigation was carried out by the department to establish fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts as required under section 74. It was argued that treating a deposit made under protest as a voluntary admission of liability for the purpose of imposing interest and penalty was unjustified and contrary to law. On the strength of these submissions, the matter was accordingly placed before the Himachal Pradesh High Court.
High Court Held
The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that the amount deposited under protest could not be construed as an admission of liability so as to justify imposition of interest and penalty under section 74 of the CGST Act and the Himachal Pradesh GST Act. The Court observed that reversal of ITC could not be sustained solely on the basis of suspicion or pressure, absent a reasoned determination based on material evidence. It was categorically held that a payment made under protest does not constitute a voluntary act, and cannot confer upon the Department of Revenue the authority to invoke penal consequences without proper adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside.
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied
Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
CA | CS | CMA
