Facts of the Case

Kalandi Sahoo challenged an order dated 16th December, 2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Cuttack-I East Circle under Section 73 of the GST Act for tax periods April to November 2020, which was affirmed in appeal on 31st July, 2025. Since the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), the forum for a second appeal under Section 112, had not been constituted at the time, the petitioner argued he could not be left remediless and approached the Orissa High Court. By the time the matter was heard, however, the Central Government had notified 30th June, 2026 as the date up to which such appeals could be filed, and GSTN had issued a detailed staggered e-filing schedule for the GSTAT portal based on when the first appeal (APL-01/03) had been filed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a writ petition challenging a confirmed GST demand should be entertained once the GST Appellate Tribunal has become functional and a structured filing window has been notified.
  2. Whether the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) remains a precondition even though the Tribunal's non-constitution had earlier justified writ intervention.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The statutory appellate remedy before the GSTAT was not available as the Tribunal had not been constituted and made functional, so the petitioner should not be rendered remediless and the writ petition should be entertained on merits.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Department confirmed the earlier non-constitution of the GSTAT but argued that this did not absolve the petitioner from complying with the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) — full payment of admitted dues plus 10% of the disputed tax (subject to a Rs. 20 crore cap) — once the appeal could be filed.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that while a writ court can entertain a challenge where the statutory forum is not functional, it must equally ensure strict compliance with conditions attached to that remedy once it becomes available, rather than let a petitioner bypass the pre-deposit safeguard by remaining in writ jurisdiction.
  • Noting Notification S.O. No.4220(E) dated 17.09.2025 (fixing 30.06.2026 as the outer date for filing GSTAT appeals) and the staggered e-filing schedule tied to the date of the first appellate order, the Court held the GSTAT was now functional and the dispute could be adjudicated there.
  • The writ petition was disposed of with directions that the petitioner deposit the Section 112(8) pre-deposit (if not already made) and file the appeal per the notified GSTAT e-filing timeline, without the Court expressing any opinion on the merits of the First Appellate Order.

Important Clarification

  • With the GST Appellate Tribunal now operational and a detailed, staggered e-filing schedule notified (filing windows keyed to the date of the original first-appeal order, extending up to 30.06.2026), writ courts are declining to retain GST demand challenges and are relegating assessees to the GSTAT, subject to the Section 112(8) pre-deposit.
  • Even in cases begun as writs due to the Tribunal's earlier non-constitution, courts insist on strict compliance with the pre-deposit condition once the alternate remedy becomes available.

Sections Involved

  • Section 112, CGST Act, 2017 – governs appeals to the GST Appellate Tribunal, including the sub-section (8) pre-deposit condition central to this order.
  • Section 73, CGST Act, 2017 – the original demand provision under which the underlying tax dispute arose.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was disposed of without a ruling on the merits, relegating the petitioner to the newly functional GSTAT on payment of the statutory pre-deposit — a procedural outcome neutral on the substantive tax dispute.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. Case No.: W.P.(C) No.30868 of 2025. Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman. Date of Order: 4th December, 2025.

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.