The Orissa High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed by a taxpayer challenging a GST demand order, directing the petitioner to approach the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) and comply with the statutory pre-deposit requirement prescribed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The Bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M.S. Raman held that although writ jurisdiction may be invoked when the statutory appellate forum is unavailable, once the tribunal becomes functional and a mechanism for filing appeals is provided, taxpayers must pursue the statutory remedy in accordance with the conditions prescribed under the GST law.
The petitioner had challenged an order dated 2 May 2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under Section 73 of the CGST Act for the tax period from 1 April 2025 to 30 April 2025. The order was subsequently affirmed by the appellate authority on 8 September 2025.
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that although Section 112 of the CGST Act provides for a further appeal to the GST Appellate Tribunal, such remedy was practically unavailable earlier due to the non-constitution and non-functioning of the tribunal. On this basis, the petitioner approached the High Court under its writ jurisdiction seeking relief.
The State’s counsel acknowledged that the tribunal had not been functional earlier but argued that this circumstance did not exempt the petitioner from complying with the mandatory statutory condition prescribed under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act.
Under this provision, an appeal before the GSTAT can be filed only after payment in full of the admitted tax, interest, fine, fee, and penalty; and payment of an additional amount equal to 10% of the disputed tax, subject to a maximum cap of ₹20 crore.
The department contended that the writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be used to bypass such statutory requirements.
The Court also took note of a notification issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, on 17 September 2025. The notification extended the timeline for filing appeals before the GSTAT up to 30 June 2026 for orders communicated before 1 April 2026.
Additionally, the authorities issued a User Advisory for the GSTAT e-Filing Portal, introducing a staggered timeline for filing second appeals depending on when the first appeal or revisional notice was filed. The advisory clarified that taxpayers could still file appeals on any subsequent date within the prescribed window, provided it is before the final deadline.
The High Court reiterated the settled legal position that a writ petition may be entertained when the statutory appellate forum is not functional, as litigants cannot be left without a remedy.
However, the Bench emphasised that once the statutory forum becomes operational, litigants must follow the mechanism prescribed under the law. The Court observed that the existence of writ jurisdiction does not permit taxpayers to circumvent mandatory statutory conditions attached to the appellate remedy.
Disposing of the writ petition, the Court issued the various directions: The petitioner must deposit the statutory amount required under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act if it has not already been deposited. The petitioner must file an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal within the timeline specified in the GSTAT e-filing advisory. If the appeal is filed in accordance with statutory requirements, the GSTAT shall entertain the appeal.
The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the dispute arising from the appellate order. The writ petition was disposed of solely on the ground that the appropriate statutory forum is now available.
Case Details
Case Title: Girija Shankar Sendh Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Goods and Services Tax, Odisha and others
Case No.: W.P.(C) No.358 of 2026
Date: 12.03.2026
Counsel For Petitioner: Sriman Arpit Mohanty, Advocate
Counsel For Respondent: Seshadeb Das
Read More: GST Registration Limit in India | 2026
