Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Devdev Pati, Bhubaneswar, challenged an order dated 13th August 2024 passed by the State Tax Officer under Section 73 of the CGST/OGST Act, 2017 for tax periods April 2019 to March 2020, which was affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Authority. Since the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) — the second statutory appellate forum under Section 112 — was not constituted or functional at the relevant time, the petitioner invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 226. By the time of hearing, the GSTAT had become operational, and the Government had notified a staggered ARN/CRN-based appeal-filing schedule extending up to 30 June 2026.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a writ petition challenging an appellate order is maintainable where the GSTAT was not constituted or functional at the relevant time.
  2. Whether such non-constitution excuses compliance with the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) now that the GSTAT is functional.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The GSTAT not being constituted or functional, the statutory second appellate remedy under Section 112 was unavailable at the time, justifying invocation of writ jurisdiction against the appellate order.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The department's counsel corroborated the non-constitution of the GSTAT at the relevant time but maintained that it does not excuse compliance with the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8), and relied on the notification dated 17.09.2025 and the GSTAT e-filing portal's staggered timeline up to 30.06.2026.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court reiterated that writ jurisdiction may be invoked when a statutory forum is non-functional, but that conditions attached to that remedy, including pre-deposit, must be strictly complied with once the forum becomes available, and that a litigant cannot use the earlier non-functionality as a shelter to bypass statutory conditions indefinitely.
  • Since the GSTAT has since become functional with a staggered filing schedule notified up to 30 June 2026, the Court declined to keep the writ pending and directed the petitioner to deposit the amount required under Section 112(8) and file the appeal within the notified timeline, expressly clarifying that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the first appellate order.

Important Clarification

  • With the GST Appellate Tribunal now functional and a staggered, ARN/CRN-based filing window notified up to 30 June 2026, writ petitions filed solely because of GSTAT's earlier non-constitution are being disposed of across High Courts with directions to avail the statutory appeal instead.
  • Compliance with the Section 112(8) pre-deposit remains mandatory and is unaffected by the Tribunal's earlier non-functionality.

Sections Involved

  • Section 112(8), CGST Act, 2017 – mandatory pre-deposit before filing appeal before the GSTAT.
  • Section 73, CGST/OGST Act, 2017 – original demand order under challenge.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions, in part in favour of the department — the assessee was directed to comply with the statutory pre-deposit and pursue the GSTAT appeal, with the merits of the demand left open.

Case Details

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.13888 of 2026; Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice and Hon'ble Mr Justice Murahari Sri Raman; Date: 14.05.2026.

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.