RR Kabel Faces CGST Appeals Worth ₹36.90 Crores Filed by Principal Commissioner
RR Kabel Limited disclosed that Principal Commissioner CGST & CE, Vadodara-I Commissionerate filed appeals against favorable refund orders worth ₹36,90,78,517/- issued on 26 September 2024. The appeals challenge refunds for October 2018-November 2018 (₹5,16,77,444/-) and April 2019-September 2021 (₹31,74,01,073/-), disputing whether refunds were correctly claimed under Rule 89(4) versus Rule 89(4B). Despite the appeals, the company expects no material financial implications.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
RR Kabel Limited has informed stock exchanges about appeals filed by the Principal Commissioner CGST & CE, Vadodara-I Commissionerate challenging favorable refund orders worth ₹36.90 crores. The company made this disclosure under Regulation 30 of SEBI Listing Regulations on 1 April 2026.
Appeal Details and Background
The Principal Commissioner has filed appeals against two Order-In-Appeal numbers VAD-CGST-001-APP-COMMR-231-2024-25 and VAD-CGST-001-APP-COMMR-230-2024-25, both issued on 26 September 2024 in favor of RR Kabel. These appeals will be heard before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT).
| Appeal Period: | Refund Amount | Penalty Amount |
|---|---|---|
| October 2018 to November 2018: | ₹5,16,77,444/- | ₹51,67,744/- |
| April 2019 to September 2021: | ₹31,74,01,073/- | ₹3,17,40,107/- |
| Total: | ₹36,90,78,517/- | ₹3,69,07,851/- |
Nature of Dispute
The dispute centers on a refund matter where the Department initially alleged erroneous refund under Section 73(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, along with interest under Section 50 and penalty under Sections 73(9) and 122. The Department invoked Rule 89(4B) read with Notification No. 79/2017-Cus in their original assessment.
RR Kabel maintained that the refund was correctly claimed under Section 54(3) read with Rule 89(4), arguing that no benefit of the said notification was availed. The appellate authority accepted the company's position and dropped the demand in orders dated 26 September 2024.
Current Appeal Contentions
The Department has now challenged these favorable orders, contending that the refunds aggregating to ₹36,90,78,517/- were incorrectly allowed under Rule 89(4) instead of Rule 89(4B). This represents the core legal disagreement between the tax authorities and the company regarding the appropriate refund provision.
Company's Position
RR Kabel has stated that it does not expect any material financial implications on account of these appeals. The company has fulfilled its disclosure obligations by informing both BSE Limited and National Stock Exchange of India Limited about the development.
The intimation has also been uploaded on the company's website at www.rrkabel.com as part of its transparency commitments. Company Secretary and Compliance Officer Anup Vaibhav C. Khanna signed the disclosure document on behalf of RR Kabel Limited.
How might the GSTAT ruling on this case set precedent for similar GST refund disputes across the cable manufacturing industry?
What impact could a potential adverse tribunal decision have on RR Kabel's cash flow and working capital management?
Will this GST dispute affect RR Kabel's ability to secure new contracts or impact customer confidence in the near term?

































