The Allahabad High Court held that the Appellate Authority under Section 107(11) of the CGST Act lacks power to remand matters, annulling refund-related remand orders and relying on its earlier ruling in Anand & Anand vs. Principal Commissioner of CGST prohibiting such action.
PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the Appellate Authority under Section 107(11) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) lacks the authority to remand cases back to the adjudicating authority. The Court annulled several remand orders linked to a refund dispute involving a prominent law firm.
Justice Vikas Budhwar, in his ruling, indicated that the issue was no longer new law and referenced an earlier decision regarding the same applicant in Anand & Anand (Law Firm) vs. Principal Commissioner of CGST (decided on 04.09.2025). In that ruling, the Court had explicitly stated that the Appellate Authority cannot remand cases due to an explicit statutory prohibition.
The applicant, a well-known law firm registered for GST in Noida, provides legal services to both domestic and international clients. The firm claimed to have delivered services to foreign clients and received payment in convertible foreign exchange, thereby qualifying as export services under GST law.
For the period from March 2021 to August 2021, the firm submitted a refund application under Section 54 of the CGST Act in Form GST RFD-01, seeking a refund of unused ITC on exports of services without tax payment.
However, the department provided system-generated communications (RFD-08) asserting that the Foreign Inward Remittance Certificates (FIRCs) indicated that services were performed in India, rendering the remittance unrelated to export services. Consequently, the refund claims were denied through Orders-in-Original dated 31.10.2023.
Unsatisfied with this outcome, the applicant appealed to the Joint Commissioner, CGST (Appeals), Noida. The Appellate Authority, in orders dated 30.04.2024 (Leading Petition), 28.06.2024 (Connected C1), and 31.05.2024 (Connected C2 and C3), acknowledged findings in favor of the applicant regarding the fulfillment of export conditions.
Despite these favorable findings, the authority remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority for reassessment of the place of supply after reviewing the documents.
The applicant challenged the remand component of these appellate orders before the High Court. The key question for the Court was whether the appellate authority possesses the power to remand cases under Section 107(11) of the CGST Act.
Section 107(11) specifies that the appellate authority may validate, modify, or annul the appealed decision but cannot return the case to the adjudicating authority.
The revenue argued that since the GST Tribunal is now operational, the applicant should pursue that remedy instead. However, when questioned by the Court, the revenue conceded that no regulatory provision permits remand under Section 107(11).
The Court relied on a Division Bench ruling in Kronos Solutions India (P.) Ltd., which stated that once the law restricts appellate powers to confirming, modifying, or annulling orders, no inherent authority to remand can be exercised.
The High Court emphasized that despite noting the applicant’s fulfillment of export requirements, the appellate authority’s decision to remand the case contradicted regulatory mandates.
While the revenue contended that the applicant should approach the GST Tribunal, the Court declined to direct the applicant to seek another remedy. It asserted that the appellate authority had acted beyond its jurisdiction by ordering a remand, thus violating Section 107(11), making the writ petitions maintainable.
The Court granted the writ petitions, nullifying the appellate orders from 30.04.2024, 28.06.2024, and 31.05.2024 that had remanded the cases to the adjudicating authority.
The Court instructed the Joint Commissioner, CGST (Appeals), Noida, to reconsider the appeals in accordance with the law within two months.
Case Title: M/S Anand And Anand (Law Firm) Vs The Principal Commissioner Central Goods &
Services Tax And 2 Others
Read Attachment: