A high-level committee constituted by the Tribunal has recommended a series of amendments to the GSTAT (Procedure) Rules, 2025. The proposals seek to simplify appeal filing procedures, reduce compliance burdens on taxpayers, improve case management, and enhance the efficiency of tribunal operations. 

The recommendations emerged from the 3rd and 4th meetings of the “Committee for Resolution of Representations Received from Various Trade and Bar Associations,” held on May 29 and June 1, 2026, under the chairmanship of GSTAT President Justice (Dr.) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra. The committee considered numerous suggestions received from trade bodies, industry stakeholders, and tax professionals regarding difficulties faced in the implementation of the GSTAT Procedure Rules. 

Relief from Certified Copy Requirements

One of the most taxpayer-friendly recommendations relates to the filing of certified copies of orders. The committee has proposed that where the impugned order is already available on the GST common portal, appellants should not be required to file a separate certified copy along with the appeal. 

The committee also suggested broadening the definition of “certified copy” to permit authentication by the appellant or respondent themselves, in addition to authorized representatives and departmental officers. This change is expected to reduce procedural delays and documentation hurdles. 

Registrar’s Powers Clarified

The committee recommended amending Rule 15(b) to clarify that the Registrar may notify procedures for filing appeals only “as directed by the Tribunal.” This amendment is intended to remove ambiguity regarding the extent of the Registrar’s administrative powers and reinforce judicial oversight over procedural matters. 

Verification Requirement for Appeals

A notable recommendation concerns Rule 22 dealing with endorsement and verification of appeals. The committee proposed insertion of a note requiring appellants to provide a verification statement confirming that the facts, grounds of appeal, and annexures are true and correct to the best of their knowledge, belief, and information. The verification would be identified by an advocate or tax professional in Form GSTAT APL-05. 

The proposal was adopted by a majority vote of 5-1, with one committee member dissenting. 

Greater Flexibility for Regional Language Documents

The committee also recommended relaxation of strict translation requirements. Under the proposed amendment, GSTAT benches would have discretionary power to waive the requirement of English translations in appropriate cases. Additionally, the committee recommended omission of Rule 23(2), which presently prevents matters from being listed until all relied-upon documents are translated into English. 

This change is likely to benefit litigants from non-English-speaking regions and reduce delays in appeal processing. 

Defect Rectification Process Overhauled

Perhaps the most substantial procedural reform relates to Rule 24 governing scrutiny of appeals and rectification of defects.

The committee proposed replacing the existing system with a structured mechanism under which:

• The Registrar must issue an electronic notice through the GSTAT portal identifying defects.
• Parties would receive 15 working days to rectify defects.
• The Registrar may grant personal hearings and extend compliance periods.
• The overall period for rectification may extend up to 45 days from filing.
• Appeals would not be rejected outright; instead, unresolved defects would be placed before the appropriate bench for final decision. 

The recommendations are expected to provide litigants greater procedural fairness and reduce dismissals arising from technical deficiencies. 

Wider Scope for Interlocutory Applications

The committee proposed expanding Rule 29 governing interlocutory applications. In addition to stay applications, condonation of delay and rectification requests, the revised rule would expressly permit applications seeking restoration of matters and other interim reliefs. 

Importantly, the committee clarified that filing an interlocutory application would not be mandatory merely for seeking adjournment of a listed matter, thereby reducing procedural formalities for routine hearing requests. 

Weekly Cause Lists to Replace Daily Listings

To improve predictability and assist litigants in planning appearances, the committee recommended replacing daily cause lists with weekly cause lists. Under the proposal, the Registrar would publish the cause list for the following week before the close of business on the last working day of the preceding week. 

The committee also proposed empowering the President, Vice-President, or presiding member to issue supplementary lists whenever required. 

Flexibility for Filing Replies and Cross-Objections

The proposed amendments would permit benches to extend the time available to respondents for filing replies beyond the existing one-month period where circumstances warrant. Similar modifications have been suggested in relation to cross-objections and rejoinders, providing greater procedural flexibility in complex cases. 

No Change Recommended in Rectification Limitation Period

The committee declined to amend Rule 108 relating to rectification of orders. It observed that the existing provision governs the limitation period for parties seeking rectification, whereas Section 113(3) of the CGST Act separately governs the Tribunal’s power to amend its orders.

According to the committee, modifying both timelines could create jurisdictional complications and generate unnecessary litigation. Consequently, the existing framework was retained. 

Recommendation for Fee Relief

Although the committee acknowledged concerns regarding GSTAT filing fees, it noted that fee-related provisions are prescribed under Rule 110(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and therefore fall outside its jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the committee observed that comparatively lower fee structures exist before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), suggesting that the Ministry of Finance may consider the issue. 

The committee also recommended insertion of a proviso exempting taxpayers from payment of fees when filing applications for rectification of errors under Section 112(10) of the CGST Act. 

Significance of the Recommendations

The proposed amendments reflect GSTAT’s attempt to make appellate proceedings more accessible, technology-driven, and less dependent on procedural technicalities. If accepted by the Government, the reforms could substantially reduce compliance burdens, accelerate disposal of appeals, and improve access to justice for taxpayers and tax authorities alike.

The recommendations now await consideration by the appropriate authorities for formal incorporation into the GSTAT (Procedure) Rules, 2025. 

The GSTAT committee has proposed wide-ranging procedural reforms, including relaxation of certified copy requirements, a more taxpayer-friendly defect rectification mechanism, weekly cause lists, greater flexibility in filing replies and interlocutory applications, and fee relief for rectification petitions, all aimed at making GST appellate litigation more efficient and accessible.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Minutes of the Meeting and Download Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.