Appellate Authority sets aside GST order for Kalpataru Projects
Kalpataru Projects International Limited reported that the Appellate Authority set aside a GST order for FY 2019-20. The ruling removes a tax demand of ₹1.52 crore, interest of ₹0.70 lakh, and penalty of ₹15.17 lakhs. The company had previously disclosed receiving GST orders in August 2024 covering multiple years. This specific resolution addresses the excess input tax credit allegation for FY 2019-20.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Kalpataru Projects International Limited secured a favorable ruling from the Appellate Authority, which set aside a Goods and Services Tax (GST) order for the fiscal year 2019-20. The decision eliminates a total liability comprising a tax demand of ₹1.52 crore, interest of ₹0.70 lakh, and a penalty of ₹15.17 lakhs. The original order had been issued by the GST Authority on the grounds of excess claim of input tax credit. The company received the appellate order on July 23, 2026, at approximately 04:19 P.M. (IST).
This disclosure was made in compliance with Regulation 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. The resolution removes a contingent liability that had been flagged in an earlier intimation dated August 29, 2024. That earlier filing had informed investors about the initial GST Authority orders received on August 29, 2024, which covered multiple fiscal years including FY 2019-20, FY 2020-21, and FY 2021-22.
Details of the Resolved Liability
The specific order set aside by the Appellate Authority pertained exclusively to the FY 2019-20 period. The financial components of the resolved demand are detailed below:
| Component | Amount |
|---|---|
| Tax Demand | ₹1.52 crore |
| Interest | ₹0.70 lakh |
| Penalty | ₹15.17 lakhs |
The GST Authority had originally raised these demands under Sections 73 and 74 of the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with relevant provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The primary allegation was the excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). By setting aside this specific order, the Appellate Authority has nullified the requirement for Kalpataru Projects to pay these amounts for the specified fiscal year.
Context of Broader Dispute
While the FY 2019-20 matter has been resolved in favor of the company, the August 29, 2024 filing indicated broader disputes with various State GST Departments. The aggregate demands across all cited fiscal years (FY 2019-20, FY 2020-21, and FY 2021-22) included an aggregate tax amount of ₹2.97 crores, interest of ₹0.16 crores, and penalties of ₹1.61 crores. These broader allegations also cited time-barred availment of ITC and availment of ITC on blocked supplies. The current disclosure confirms the resolution of only the FY 2019-20 component, leaving the status of other fiscal years subject to ongoing appeals or separate proceedings as per the company's earlier stance to defend such matters within prescribed timelines.
What the Numbers Show
The resolution of the FY 2019-20 case represents a complete reversal of the assessed liability for that period. With the tax demand of ₹1.52 crore and associated costs removed, the immediate cash outflow risk associated with this specific vintage is eliminated. This outcome validates the company's defense strategy regarding input tax credit claims for that year, potentially strengthening its position in similar disputes across other fiscal years where allegations of excess ITC claims were also raised.
Historical Stock Returns for Kalpataru Projects International
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +0.15% | -1.53% | -9.70% | +17.34% | +8.52% | +173.12% |
How will the resolution of the FY 2019-20 GST dispute impact Kalpataru Projects' cash flow and working capital management in the near term?
What is the current status of the ongoing appeals for FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22, and are there any upcoming hearing dates that could influence market sentiment?
Does the favorable ruling on input tax credit claims for FY 2019-20 establish a legal precedent that strengthens Kalpataru's defense strategy in similar disputes across other fiscal years?


































