Introduction
The Goods and Services Tax (‘GST’) Amnesty Scheme for filing GST Appeals was notified[i] by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (‘CBIC’) on 02.11.2023, exercising its powers conferred under s. 148 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act’), based on the recommendation of the 52nd GST Council.
Who Can Avail of the Benefits of the Scheme?
Any taxable person who failed to file an appeal against the order passed by the proper officer on or before 31.03.2023 under ss. 73 or 74 of the CGST Act, within the specified time period.
Any taxable person whose appeal was rejected solely on the grounds that it was not filed within the period of limitation, as specified under s. 107 of the CGST Act.
Deadline for Filing Appeals
Taxpayers can file appeals against orders passed by the proper officer using FORM GST APL-01 until 31.01.2024, as per the provisions of s. 107(1) of the CGST Act.
Conditions for Availing the Scheme
Before filing an appeal under the notification, the taxable person must:
Make a full payment of tax, interest, fine, fee, and penalty arising from the impugned orders passed by the proper officer.
Provide a pre-deposit equal to 12.5% of the tax under dispute, with a maximum limit of Rs. 25 crores. Further, at least 20% of this amount should be paid via the electronic cash ledger.
A barring condition is that appeals not arising out of an impending tax demand shall not be deemed admissible under the said notification.
Further, no refunds would be granted until the appeals are disposed of, for any excess amount paid by the appellant before issuance of the said notification.
Analysis
The GST Amnesty Scheme offers a crucial opportunity for eligible taxpayers to rectify non-compliance by filing appeals until 31.01.2024. The benefits include streamlined resolution of pending appeals, promotion of adherence to GST regulations, and a more efficient taxation system. By providing an extended window for appeals and setting specific conditions, the scheme facilitates a comprehensive approach to address past non-compliance issues within a defined timeframe.
End Note
[i] Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, Notification 53/2023 – Central Tax, dt. 02.11.2023.
Authored by Anshi Bhatia, Advocate at Metalegal Advocates. The views expressed are personal and do not constitute legal opinion.
AUTHORED BY
More Insights
22-06-2026
8
min read
Claim Admission is not Debt Acknowledgement: Supreme Court on RP’s Role & Limitation under the IBC
Can admission of a claim by a Resolution Professional extend limitation under section 18 of the Limitation Act? In Shankar Khandelwal v. Omkara Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd., the Supreme Court answered this question in the negative, holding that claim admission during CIRP is merely a statutory claim-verification process and not an acknowledgement of debt. The ruling clarifies the RP’s non-adjudicatory role and reinforces important principles governing limitation under the IBC.
2026-04-23
18
min read
Mandatory Pre-Deposit for Appeals in Indirect Tax Laws: A Barrier to Justice?
Mandatory pre-deposit has become a defining feature of indirect tax litigation, balancing revenue protection with access to appellate remedies. While the shift to a fixed statutory framework has improved procedural efficiency, it also raises concerns regarding financial barriers and effective access to justice. This insight examines the legal evolution, judicial interpretation, and practical implications of the regime.
2026-04-20
10
min read
Legal Strategy in Startup Ecosystems: Risk Mitigation and Value Maximisation from Formation to Exit
Legal structuring across the startup lifecycle extends beyond compliance to shape valuation, governance, and investor confidence. From intellectual property protection and entity selection to funding arrangements and exit mechanisms, each stage involves critical legal considerations that determine risk allocation and long-term scalability within a regulated framework.