NON-APPEALABLE DECISIONS & ORDER.SECTION 121, Goods and Services Tax - GST

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Non-appealable decisions and orders.

121. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any provisions of this Act, no appeal shall lie against any decision taken or order passed by an officer of central tax if such decision taken or order passed relates to any one or more of the following matters, namely:-

(a) XXXX

(b) XXXX

(c) an order sanctioning prosecution under this Act; or

(d) XXXX

In terms of Section 132(6) of the CGST Act,a person shall not be prosecuted for any offence except with the previous sanction of the Commissioner. Meaning, prior order/sanction of the Commissioner is mandatory to prosecute any person for offences falling under Section 132(1) (a) to (l) of the Act. And in terms of Section 121, such sanction/order of the Commissioner is non-appealable under the CGST Act.

The issue here is:

In case, the sanction for prosecution ordered under Section 132(6) fails to establish the essential charge inscribed in the opening phrase of Section 132 namely, "whoever commits, or causes to commit and retain the benefits arising out of, any of the following offences namely", then the foundation of the prosecution trembles per se.

Is it not challengeable in the Trail Court, when such sanction for prosecution is non-appealable under the CGST Act?

Here I take the support of recent judgement dated 16/04/2025 of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of Amit Manilal Haria Vs. Commissioner of CGST reported in 2025 (4) TMI 1236 on the similar phrase relating to the levy of penalty under Section 122(1A) of the Act which is held in favour of the petitioners.

Experts to throw their deep thoughts to protect the innocent people.

Posts / Replies

[Sadanand Bulbule]

The issue in this case not only involves the legality of the actions of the authorities/ Commissioner under the CGST Act, but essentially involves the basics of jurisprudence to protect the freedom and dignity of the innocent persons.The simple reason is that, the Arrest Memo to be issued under Section 69 should be essentially based on the incontrovertible evidence establishing the soul of Section 132, the opening phrase mentioned above. Otherwise the merits of both actions don't match each other as regards to the fundamental requirements of  jurisprudence.

So in my opinion, very sensitive issues are involved. Hence sensitive comments are sought.

[Sadanand Bulbule]

It is well settled that, one should come out of small room to reach the ultimate truth, irrespective of which side it points at. This is the wisdom of the lawmakers. There is no substitute for this.