2026-VIL-133-GSTAT-CMT

SGST Tribunal

GST - Appeal involving ‘question of law’ within the meaning of Section 109(8) of the CGST Act, 2017 - Determination of Coram under Section 109(8) – Respondent-revenue contended that no question of law was involved in the appeal - Whether the appeal involves a question of law requiring it to be heard by a Division Bench of one Judicial Member and one Technical Member, as opposed to a Single Member - HELD - Section 109(8) provides that an appeal within the prescribed monetary limit which does not involve any question of law may be heard by a Single Member, and that in all other cases it shall be heard by a Division Bench, the expression used being ‘any question of law’ – Though the term ‘question of law’ is not defined under the Act, where interpretation of legal principles, statute or precedent is involved, a question of law is held to arise - The question whether a notice under Section 74(1) can be issued in the absence of allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts requires interpretation of the foundational requirement of Section 74 and constitutes a question of law - The question whether the order in appeal is violative of Section 107(13) of the Act, having been issued more than one year after filing of the appeal, also involves interpretation of the statute and constitutes a question of law - The submissions of the appellant regarding the question of law involved are found to be sustainable, and the submissions of the Respondent are found not sustainable - The present appeal is held to involve a question of law within the meaning of Section 109(8) of the CGST Act, 2017, and shall accordingly be heard by Division Bench – Ordered accordingly

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page