Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 06 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-09-18 partly_allowed

M/S. TECNIMONT PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS TECNIMONT ICB PVT. LTD) vs STATE OF PUNJAB

Bench: 2 — Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra

In Brief

This case addresses the constitutional validity of Section 62(5) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005, which requires appellants to deposit 25% of the disputed tax demand before their appeals can be entertained. The Supreme Court held that the state has constitutional authority to impose such pre-deposit conditions on appeals as a reasonable regulation of the statutory right of appeal. The Court rejected arguments that this requirement violated Article 14 equality rights. However, the Court also held that appellate authorities lack implied power to waive the pre-deposit requirement based on hardship claims; doing so would nullify the statutory mandate. Relief in genuine hardship cases must be sought through writ petitions challenging arbitrary assessments, not through the appellate authority's discretion.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Constitutional Law Tax Law Value Added Tax Right of Appeal Pre-deposit Requirements Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login