IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No. 779 of 2026 V.R. Minerals, Ranchi, through its partner, Paresh Ghosal, S/o Late Hari Mohan Ghosal, R/o Pathalkudwa, P.O.-GPO, P.S.-Lower Bazaar, District-Ranchi ….. Petitioner Versus 1. Central Goods & Service Tax & Central Excise, through its Principal Commissioner, Ranchi 2. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods & Service Tax & Central Excise, Ranchi 3. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods & Service Tax & Central Excise, Ranchi 4. Deputy Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax, Ranchi South Division, Ranchi ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Amit Kumar, Sr. S.C. (CGST) ----- 02/11.02.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the request and consent of learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this writ petition finally. 3. The petitioner’s appeal against the order in original dated 06.12.2023 has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority for failure to make 10% pre-deposit as required under law. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if only additional opportunity is granted to make the pre-deposit within a period of three weeks from today and the petitioner’s Appeal No. 914/CGST/RAN/2025 is restored by setting aside the Appellate Authority’s order dated 28.11.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner explains that the said appeal was instituted in offline mode. Therefore, the petitioner was neither intimated of the default nor was given any opportunity to correct the default. He submits that even the impugned order dated 2026:JHHC:3629-DB 2 28.11.2025 was passed without hearing the petitioner and thereby granting the petitioner an opportunity of making good the default. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents though does not object to the course now suggested by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he submits that this Court should clarify that if the pre-deposit is not made within a period of three weeks as undertaken, the petitioner’s appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Appellant Authority or his Court. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents further clarifies that his consent is based upon the orders passed by this Court in W.P. (T) Nos. 4717 of 2022 & 1524 of 2021 where similar indulgence was extended to the assessee in similar circumstances. 8. We appreciate such fairness on the part of learned counsel for the respondents. 9. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the Appellate Authority’s order dated 28.11.2025 and restored the petitioner’s Appeal No. 914/CGST/RAN/2025 to the file of the Appellate Authority. 10. The petitioner, consistent with the undertaking given by his counsel on instructions today before the Court, must comply with the requirement of pre-deposit within three weeks from the date of uploading of this order. If this requirement is complied with, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal in accordance with law on its own merits. 11. However, if the petitioner fails to comply with the requirement of pre-deposit within the timeline as indicated above, this writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed without further reference to the Court. 2026:JHHC:3629-DB 3 12. As a consequence, the Appellate Authority’s order dated 28.11.2025 shall remain undisturbed and its consequences shall follow. 13. This writ petition is disposed of in above terms without any order of costs. 14. All concerned are directed to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) (RAJESH SHANKAR, J.) 11.02.2026 Satish/Vikas/