Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Ghanashyama Sahoo of Bhadrak, challenged an order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the Section Officer, CT & GST Circle, Bhadrak, under Section 74 of the CGST/OGST Act, 2017 for tax periods July 2017 to March 2018, affirmed in appeal on 28.11.2023. As with a companion matter heard the same day, the petitioner could not avail the second-appeal remedy under Section 112 because the GST Appellate Tribunal had not been constituted, and by the time of hearing the Central Government's notification dated 17.09.2025 (S.O. No.4220(E)) and the GSTAT e-Filing Portal user advisory had opened a staggered filing window before the now-functional Tribunal.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ petition should continue given the GST Appellate Tribunal's functionality and the notified staggered filing window.
  2. What pre-conditions and timeline should govern the petitioner's appeal before the Tribunal.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner's counsel highlighted the earlier non-availability of the GSTAT as the reason the second appeal could not be filed within time.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Additional Standing Counsel for the Department corroborated the earlier non-constitution of the GSTAT but submitted that the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) — full admitted tax/interest/penalty plus 10% of the disputed balance, capped at Rs.20 crore — must still be complied with before the appeal can be filed.

Court Order / Findings

  • Following the same reasoning applied in the companion matter heard that day, the Court held that with the Tribunal now functional and the filing period extended to accommodate the earlier delay, it would not be proper to keep the writ petition pending, as the dispute can be adjudicated by the statutory forum.
  • The petitioner was directed to deposit the Section 112(8) pre-deposit if not already paid and to file the appeal per the notified staggered timeline; if filed in order, the GSTAT was directed to entertain it.
  • The Court expressly clarified it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the First Appellate Order.

Important Clarification

  • Where the GST Appellate Tribunal has become functional and CBIC has notified a staggered filing window (Notification dated 17.09.2025) to cure the earlier non-constitution, pending writ challenges to Section 74 demands are being relegated to the Tribunal rather than decided on merits by the High Court.
  • The Section 112(8) pre-deposit condition is not excused merely because the delay in filing was caused by the Tribunal's non-constitution.

Sections Involved

  • Section 112, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – second appeal to the GST Appellate Tribunal and its mandatory pre-deposit.
  • Section 74, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – the provision under which the original demand was raised.

Decision – In Favour of

The matter was disposed of with directions, without a finding on merits — the petitioner was relegated to the GST Appellate Tribunal under the notified timeline, leaving the correctness of the underlying demand open.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
Case No.: W.P.(C) No.16823 of 2025
Coram: Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman
Date of Order: 23.03.2026

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.