Departmental Appeals Need Not Be Referred To Special Bench Constituted For Taxpayer Appeals

By | September 24, 2026
0 Comment
Departmental Appeals Need Not Be Referred To Special Bench Constituted For Taxpayer Appeals

Issue

Whether a departmental appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the condonation of delay granted by the First Appellate Authority should be kept in abeyance or referred to a Special Bench constituted for taxpayer appeals.

Facts

  • Departmental Appeal Filed: The Revenue filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal challenging an order of the First Appellate Authority that condoned delay beyond its statutory powers.
  • Request for Special Bench Transfer: During the hearing, counsel for the respondent (assessee) requested that the departmental appeal be kept in abeyance and listed before a Special Bench constituted by the Principal Bench for similar matters.
  • Abeyance Letter Submitted: The respondent’s counsel indicated that a formal letter requesting abeyance of the proceedings had already been filed with the Bench.

Decision

  • Special Bench Scope Distinguished: The Tribunal held that the matters pending before the Special Bench pertained specifically to taxpayer appeals, whereas the present case was a departmental appeal filed by the Revenue.
  • Rejection of Abeyance Request: The Bench held that departmental appeals do not fall under the category requiring listing before the Special Bench, and accordingly rejected the respondent’s plea for abeyance.
  • Opportunity for Submissions: On further request, the Bench granted one week to file additional submissions, noting that appropriate final orders would be passed based on such submissions.
  • Verdict: Ruled in favor of the Revenue.

Key Takeaways

  1. Distinct Categorization of Appeals: Departmental appeals filed by the Revenue are distinct from taxpayer appeals and are not automatically transferable to Special Benches constituted for taxpayer matters.
  2. No Automatic Abeyance: Merely filing a letter or citing pending Special Bench proceedings in taxpayer cases does not entitle a party to obtain an order of abeyance in a departmental appeal.
  3. Tribunal Discretion on Listing: The Appellate Tribunal retains full administrative and judicial discretion under Sections 109 and 111 to determine whether an appeal warrants referral to a Special Bench based on its classification.
GOODS AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , HYDERABAD BENCH
Mandalaneni Srinivasarao
v.
Maa Engineering & Energy
A.P. Ravi, Judicial Member
and Duvvuri Krishna Srinivas, Technical Member
APL/2/HYD/2026
SEPTEMBER  4, 2026
P.V.V. Satyanarayana Murthy, N. Surender Rathod, Superintendents, S. Bala Narayana and Mohd. Khalid for the Appellant. B. Srinivas for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. The Learned department representatives, Shri S. Bala Narayana and Shri Mohd. Khalid, appeared for the Appellants.
2. The Learned Counsel, Shri B. Srinivas, appeared for the respondent.
3. The Learned department representatives submitted that the issue pertains to condonation of delay by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) beyond the powers conferred under Sec. 107(1).
4. The Learned Counsel for the respondent appeared and submits that he would adopt the submissions made by other counsels on similar issues that are listed today and he further submits that he may be given a weeks’ time to submit further submission, if required, in connection with their defence.
5. The Hon’ble Bench has brought to the notice of the Learned Counsel for the respondent that during the hearing on 8.8.2026, the Learned Counsel had specifically sought for keeping the issue in abeyance in view of the fact that the Special Bench (SB) constituted by the Principal Bench (PB) with regard to such issues and that the case may be decided after the outcome of the SB orders. In this regard, he also submits that a letter seeking to keep the issue in abeyance has already been filed.
6. This Bench, after considering the submissions made by the Learned Counsel, is of the considered opinion that the issue pertaining to similar matters before the SB relates to the appeals of the tax-payers and that, in the instant case, the appeal pertains to the department and, therefore, the instant case would not fall under the category to be listed before the SB. As such, this Bench is not inclined to accept the request made by the Learned Counsel. Upon being highlighted about the issue, the Learned Counsel now has sought for a weeks’ time to put-forth additional submissions and that the case as decided in the other batch matters may be adopted in this case also.
7. This Bench is inclined to accept the request of the Learned Counsel and directs him to file additional submissions, if required, within a week that is on or before September 11, 2026 and based on such submissions, the Bench will be proceeding to pass appropriate orders.
8. This Bench has also taken note of the Learned Counsel that there is nothing further to add as on date and that the submissions of the other Counsels in respect of other matters be adopted to the present case.
9. The Registry is directed to intimate the Bench of any such additional submissions filed by the respondent and, in such a case, their appeal may be brought to the notice of the Bench.