Facts of the Case

M/s Ranjita Swain challenged an order dated 10th March 2021 passed by the CT & GST Officer, Barbil Circle, under Section 73 of the CGST/OGST Act, 2017 for the tax periods April 2019 to March 2020, which had been affirmed in appeal on 25th September 2025. The petitioner's counsel argued that although a further appeal lies to the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) under Section 112, this remedy was, for a long period, not practically available since the GSTAT had not been constituted and made functional, leaving an aggrieved person remediless. The department did not dispute this but pointed to a statutory notification and the GSTAT's own e-filing advisory now providing a staggered window for filing such appeals.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ Court should continue to entertain a challenge to a GST appellate order once the GSTAT has become functional and a filing window has been notified.
  2. Whether an assessee can avoid the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) by continuing to litigate in writ jurisdiction.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The statutory remedy of a second appeal to the GSTAT under Section 112 was not available as the Tribunal had not been constituted/made functional, so the writ Court should not decline to entertain the challenge.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The department corroborated the non-constitution point but emphasised that this did not absolve the appellant from complying with Section 112(8), which bars an appeal unless the admitted tax is paid in full and 10% of the remaining disputed tax (subject to a cap of Rs. 20 crore) is deposited.
  • A CBIC notification dated 17.09.2025 and the GSTAT's e-filing user advisory now provide a staggered filing window, extending up to 30.06.2026 depending on the date of the underlying appellate order.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that a writ Court may entertain a challenge where the statutory appellate forum is not functional, but once that forum is functional and conditions attached to the appeal (such as pre-deposit) exist, the writ Court must ensure strict compliance rather than allow a party to bypass the statutory scheme.
  • Since the GSTAT is now functional and the filing window has been extended in a staggered manner, it was not proper for the writ Court to keep the petition pending.
  • The writ petition was disposed of with directions that the petitioner deposit the amount required under Section 112(8) and file the second appeal within the notified timeline via the GSTAT e-filing portal, which shall then be entertained on merits, subject to compliance with Section 112 and the Rules.
  • The Court clarified it expressed no opinion on the merits of the first appellate order.

Important Clarification

  • Non-constitution of the GSTAT was, till recently, a valid ground for writ Courts to entertain challenges to GST appellate orders directly; with the Tribunal now functional and a staggered filing window notified up to 30.06.2026 (per S.O. 4220(E) dated 17.09.2025), such writ petitions will ordinarily be relegated to the GSTAT.
  • The mandatory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) cannot be sidestepped merely because a matter was earlier pending in writ jurisdiction.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, CGST/OGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not paid or short paid other than by fraud.
  • Section 112, CGST Act, 2017 — appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, including the pre-deposit conditions under sub-section (8).

Decision – In Favour of

The petition was disposed of with directions, without a finding on merits, relegating the petitioner to the GSTAT subject to the statutory pre-deposit — neither a clean win for the Assessee nor the Department.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 31381 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman
Date of Order: 27.11.2025

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.