Patanjali Foods Limited has received an Order-in-Appeal from the Commissioner, CGST (Appeals), Meerut, dated January 29, 2026. The appellate authority rejected both the appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner and the appeal filed by the Company, thereby upholding the Order-in-Original from January 10, 2025. While a minor penalty was imposed on two key executives, the Company anticipates no major financial or operational impact from this ruling and intends to pursue further legal action.
Receipt of Appellate Communication
Patanjali Foods Limited formally disclosed the receipt of a regulatory communication designated as an Order-in-Appeal. This order originated from the Office of the Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Taxes (Appeals), Meerut, and was officially received via post on March 07, 2026, stemming from an order dated January 29, 2026.
Summary of the Order
The core finding of the communication was the rejection of two separate appeals. The appellate authority dismissed (a) the appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner, CGST, Uttar Pradesh, and (b) the appeal filed by the Company itself. Consequently, the authority upheld the Order-in-Original which was previously passed by the ADC, Central Goods and Service Taxes, Meerut, on January 10, 2025. The matter relates specifically to the GST demand detailed in that original order.
Financial and Compliance Implications
Regarding financial impact, the Company stated it does not expect any financial liability arising from the GST demand itself. However, a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- each was imposed upon two key personnel: Shri Ram Bharat, Managing Director, and Shri Kumar Rajesh, Chief Financial Officer. The Company affirmed that the ruling will not have any impact on the financial, operational, and other activities of the Company.
Action Taken by the Company
The communication confirmed that there were no direct penalties or restrictions imposed pursuant to the appeal order, apart from the specific penalties mentioned above. In response to the upheld order, The Company has stated it will be taking necessary action to defend its case before the appellate authority, indicating further legal recourse will be pursued.
Source: BSE
