NAVEEN KUMAR vs THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX Advocate - SHOBHIT SAHARIA — CEXA/7/2026

Case under Central Excise Act, 1944 (Act No. 01 of 1944) Section 35-G. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: UKHC010099242026

Filing Number

CEXA/5163/2026

Filing Date

05-Jun-2026

Registration No

CEXA/7/2026

Registration Date

05-Jun-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

APPEAL ( 3 )

Sub-Category

CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Central Excise Act, 1944 (Act No. 01 of 1944) Section 35-G

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NAVEEN KUMAR

    Adv. ROHIT ARORA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX Advocate - SHOBHIT SAHARIA

  2. 2.THE COMMISSIONER

    Adv. SHOBHIT SAHARIA

  3. 3.THE CUSTOMS

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta,Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash UpadhyayView PDF

    Summary of CEXA /7/2026 The appeal filed by Naveen Kumar against the Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax was admitted on two substantial questions of law: (1) whether CESTAT was justified in dismissing the appeal while ignoring amounts deposited by the appellant, and (2) whether CESTAT should have considered issues on merits if full deposit requirements were satisfied. The court adjourned the matter to the following week, granting the Revenue time to obtain instructions regarding a 2018 CESTAT Circular clarifying deposit requirements for second appeals. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

  4. 05-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CEXA/7/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CEXA /7/2026 The appeal filed by Naveen Kumar against the Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax was admitted on two substantial questions of law: (1) whether CESTAT was justified in dismissing the appeal while ignoring amounts deposited by the appellant, and (2) whether CESTAT should have considered issues on merits if full deposit requirements were satisfied. The court adjourned the matter to the following week, granting the Revenue time to obtain instructions regarding a 2018 CESTAT Circular clarifying deposit requirements for second appeals. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case