HomeGSTGSTAT Special Bench to Decide Whether Delay Beyond Section 107(4) Can Be...

GSTAT Special Bench to Decide Whether Delay Beyond Section 107(4) Can Be Condoned; 504 Appeals Across India Tagged

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Principal Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has constituted a Special Bench to decide a crucial jurisdictional question that could impact hundreds of pending GST appeals across the country—whether the Appellate Tribunal, while exercising powers under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, can condone delay beyond the maximum condonable period prescribed under Section 107(4) of the Act.

The issue assumes considerable importance as taxpayers whose first appeals were filed beyond the statutory condonable period have approached the GSTAT seeking relief. The Tribunal has now decided to authoritatively determine whether such appeals can still be entertained despite the limitation prescribed under Section 107(4). 

Buy Now: GST Judgements E-Compilation – June 2026

Common Question of Law Before Multiple Benches

The Special Bench observed that the same legal issue is pending before several State Benches of the GSTAT. Since identical questions of law are arising in numerous appeals filed under Section 112 of the CGST Act, the Principal Bench decided that the matter should be heard by a Special Bench to ensure consistency in the interpretation of the law. 

The order records that the central issue is: Whether the GST Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017 to condone delay beyond the statutory cap prescribed under Section 107(4) while dealing with appeals.

504 Appeals Already Identified Nationwide

The Tribunal was informed that a substantial number of appeals involving this identical legal issue are already pending before different State Benches.

As on 1 July 2026, 504 appeals had been identified across the country, distributed as follows:

GSTAT BenchNumber of Appeals
Hyderabad257
Bhopal75
Kolkata46
Chennai35
Raipur22
Guwahati21
Ranchi17
Vijayawada16
Dehradun15
Total504

The figures underscore the widespread significance of the limitation issue and its potential impact on GST appellate proceedings throughout India.

Principal Bench Directs Collection of All Similar Appeals

Recognising the nationwide implications of the controversy, the Principal Bench directed the Registry to immediately obtain details of all similar appeals pending before the various State Benches.

Additionally, reminders have been ordered to be issued to every State Bench Registry directing them to identify all appeals involving this common question of law and forward the particulars to the Principal Bench at the earliest. 

The matter has been adjourned to 20 July 2026, by which time the complete nationwide data is expected to be placed before the Special Bench. 

Why the Issue Matters

Section 107 of the CGST Act governs appeals before the First Appellate Authority. Under sub-section (4), the Appellate Authority is empowered to condone delay only up to the additional statutory period prescribed by the Act. The controversy now is whether, after such an appeal reaches the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 112, the Tribunal possesses any independent jurisdiction to overlook or condone delays beyond that statutory ceiling.

The answer to this question will determine the maintainability of numerous appeals where taxpayers could not file their first appeals within the maximum condonable period.

Link with the S.K. Chakraborty Litigation

The issue also assumes significance in the backdrop of the Calcutta High Court’s decision in S.K. Chakraborty & Sons, where the High Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 could apply to appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act, thereby permitting condonation beyond the statutory period in appropriate cases. However, that judgment has since been stayed by the Supreme Court, leaving the legal position unsettled.

Against this backdrop, the GSTAT’s Special Bench is expected to examine the Tribunal’s own jurisdiction under Section 112 independently of the pending proceedings before the Supreme Court.

Amici Curiae Appointed

The order records the appearance of Shri Sivarajan Kalyanaraman, Partner, Price Waterhouse & Co. LLP, along with Shri Sumeet Khurana, Chartered Accountant, and Shri Vikash Aggarwal, Chartered Accountant, who assisted the Special Bench as amici curiae

A Landmark Decision Expected

The constitution of a Special Bench by the GSTAT Principal Bench reflects the Tribunal’s recognition that the issue has far-reaching consequences for GST litigation across India. With more than 500 appeals already identified and additional cases expected to be tagged, the forthcoming decision is likely to become the leading precedent on the Tribunal’s powers concerning limitation and condonation of delay under the CGST Act.

Tax professionals, businesses, and litigants will now closely watch the proceedings scheduled for 20 July 2026, as the Special Bench’s ruling could determine the fate of hundreds of pending appeals and shape the future jurisprudence on limitation under the GST appellate framework.

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.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: GSTAT Constitutes Special Bench to Decide Whether Delay Beyond Statutory Limit Can Be Condoned Under GST Law

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

General Penalty Unsustainable Where Late Fee Already Levied: Madras High Court Quashes Duplicate GST Late Fee Demand

The Madras High Court has held that the GST Department cannot levy a duplicate...

3 Month Timeline U/s 121 IBC Is Directory, Delay in Bankruptcy Petition Against Personal Guarantor Can Be Condoned: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has held that the three-month period prescribed...

NCLT Can’t Interfere with ED’s PMLA Attachments During CIRP: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, has held that the National...

Holding Company Can’t Issue Shares on Behalf of Subsidiary to Claim S. 72A Demerger Tax Benefits: ITAT

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that a...

More like this

General Penalty Unsustainable Where Late Fee Already Levied: Madras High Court Quashes Duplicate GST Late Fee Demand

The Madras High Court has held that the GST Department cannot levy a duplicate...

3 Month Timeline U/s 121 IBC Is Directory, Delay in Bankruptcy Petition Against Personal Guarantor Can Be Condoned: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has held that the three-month period prescribed...

NCLT Can’t Interfere with ED’s PMLA Attachments During CIRP: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, has held that the National...