Facts of the Case

Md. Badur Jaman, a resident of Kakching district in Manipur, challenged an order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the Appellate Authority-cum-Additional Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Central Excise & Customs, Guwahati, which had rejected his GST appeal as barred by limitation. The original order under appeal had itself been passed by the Superintendent, Zone-8, Imphal East, Thoubal & Kakching District, Manipur. According to the petitioner, he could not file his appeal before the authorities at Imphal in time because of an internet ban in the region, and this compelled him to approach the appellate authority at Guwahati instead — which is why he then filed his writ petition before the Gauhati High Court rather than the Manipur High Court.

The GST department's standing counsel objected that only the High Court of Manipur, within whose jurisdiction the original assessing/adjudicating officer at Imphal was located, had jurisdiction to entertain the writ, relying on Supreme Court authority (in the context of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act) holding that an appeal from a tribunal order lies before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the original assessing officer functions.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Gauhati High Court had territorial jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition against an appellate GST order passed at Guwahati, when the original adjudicating officer was based in Manipur.
  2. Whether the petitioner's appeal against the original GST order was rightly rejected as barred by limitation.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner argued that an internet ban in his region of Manipur prevented him from filing his appeal in time before the authorities at Imphal, forcing him to approach the appellate authority at Guwahati instead, and that his writ before the Gauhati High Court was consequently maintainable.
  • He sought to have the appellate order dated 14.03.2023, rejecting his appeal on limitation, set aside.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The GST authorities' standing counsel argued that since the original order was passed by the Superintendent posted at Imphal, only the High Court of Manipur had jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to the appellate order, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. M/s Balak Capital Pvt. Ltd. (2022 LiveLaw (SC) 982) applying the principle laid down in Principal CIT-I, Chandigarh v. ABC Papers Ltd., (2002) 9 SCC 1.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court formed a prima facie opinion that the jurisdictional principle relied on by the department — that an appeal lies only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the original assessing/adjudicating officer is situated — would apply in this GST matter as well, even though that principle was developed under the Income Tax Act.
  • Rather than deciding the jurisdictional question finally, the petitioner's counsel sought leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Manipur High Court instead.
  • The Court granted this liberty and disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn, without ruling on the limitation question or the underlying GST appeal on merits.

Important Clarification

This order does not decide whether the petitioner's GST appeal was rightly rejected as time-barred — that question remains open for the Manipur High Court to examine. The practical takeaway is purely jurisdictional: a writ against a GST appellate order should ordinarily be filed before the High Court having jurisdiction over the officer who passed the original order, not the High Court where the appellate authority happens to sit.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – provisions on appeal against adjudication/appellate orders (specific section not detailed in the order)
  • Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 260A (relied on by analogy for the jurisdiction principle)

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of on withdrawal with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Manipur High Court; no decision on merits of either the limitation issue or the underlying GST appeal.

Case Details

  • Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
  • Case No.: WP(C)/5208/2023
  • CNR: GAHC010200082023
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suman Shyam
  • Date of Order: 18-09-2023

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.