The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Principal Bench has restrained the respective State Benches from passing orders on the merits of Bharti Airtel’s appeals involving GST liability on licence fees paid to the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and interest on the reversal of input tax credit where payment to vendors was delayed beyond 180 days.

The bench of Justice (Retd.) Dr Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, President of the GSTAT Principal Bench, issued notices to the respective Commissionerates asking them to show cause why the appeals should not be transferred to the Principal Bench for final disposal.

Buy Now: GSTAT E-Compilation For August 2026

The transfer applications were filed under Section 109(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The provision deals with the transfer of matters pending before the State Benches of the GST Appellate Tribunal.

During the hearing, Bharti Airtel’s authorised representatives submitted that the pending appeals involved identical questions of law requiring consideration by the Tribunal.

The first issue concerns whether licence fees paid by Bharti Airtel to the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, are liable to GST. The connected question is whether the amount of GST already paid to the Central Government is refundable under the CGST Act.

Telecommunication companies are required to pay various licence-related charges to the DoT for operating telecom services. The appeals will require the GSTAT to examine the taxability of such payments and whether the amounts deposited by the company can be claimed as a refund.

The second legal issue concerns the levy of interest when input tax credit is reversed because payment to the supplier was not made within 180 days from the date of the relevant invoice.

Under the second proviso to Section 16(2) of the CGST Act, a recipient who fails to pay the supplier the value of the supply along with the applicable tax within 180 days is required to reverse the corresponding input tax credit. Rule 37 of the CGST Rules prescribes the mechanism governing such reversal and subsequent re-availment of credit.

Bharti Airtel’s appeals raise the specific question of whether interest is payable on such an ITC reversal. The issue assumes significance because the statutory framework governing delayed vendor payments and reversal of credit has been the subject of disputes concerning the circumstances in which interest can be demanded.

The Principal Bench observed that the proceedings appeared to be second appeals filed under Section 112(1) of the CGST Act and involved identical questions of law. It consequently considered whether all the appeals should be brought before the Principal Bench for a consolidated examination and final decision.

“Prima facie, it appears that these second appeals are under Section 112(1) of the CGST Act, involving identical questions of law,” the Tribunal recorded while directing the issuance of notices.

The notices are required to be served upon the respective Commissionerates through three separate modes—the GST portal, email and speed post with acknowledgement due. The company undertook to complete the necessary procedural requirements, including filing the postal requisites, within ten days.

The Tribunal made the notices returnable within four weeks.

Significantly, the President directed the respective GSTAT State Benches not to pass any order on the merits of the underlying appeals while the transfer applications remain under consideration. This direction preserves the subject matter of the proceedings until the Principal Bench decides whether the appeals should be transferred.

At the same time, the registries of the concerned State Benches were directed to complete the scrutiny and stamp-reporting process at the earliest. The Registry of the Principal Bench was asked to communicate the order to the respective State Benches.

The matter has been listed for further consideration on October 5, 2026.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Read More: S. 147A Validating JAO-Issued Income Tax Reassessment Notices Struck Down: P&H High Court