Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

whatsappJoin Channel
Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

JUDICIAL VIEW ON WRIT vs ALTERNATE REMEDY IN GST

Dr. Sanjiv Agarwal
Alternate appellate remedy in GST limits writ jurisdiction, with courts preferring statutory appeals and interim protection where tribunal is non-functional. Writ jurisdiction in GST matters is generally unavailable where the Act provides an alternate appellate remedy, particularly an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under the statutory scheme. Where the Tribunal has not yet become functional, courts have emphasised the existence of the appellate mechanism and the Government's extension of limitation for filing appeals. The article also notes interim protection in some cases until the Tribunal is constituted, and that disputes over classification, pre-deposit, and appellate orders should ordinarily be dealt with within the statutory hierarchy. (AI Summary)

Courts have often held that writ petitions cannot be preferred under Section 112 read with Section 109 in view of filing of appeals before Appellate Tribunal in absence of such Tribunal not being functional.

Since alternate remedy is available under the Act and Government has already issued an order dated 03.12.2019 for extension of limitation for filing appeal before the Tribunal, courts have held that appellant should wait for the appeal to be filed.

Following judicial pronouncements are relevant in this regard:

InLaxmidhar Barik Versus Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), CT and GST territorial Range, Balasore and Another - 2025 (1) TMI 1836 - ORISSA HIGH COURT, where assessee filed writ petition against appellate order affirming penalty order pursuant to detention of goods of assessee, as Tribunal had not been constituted, stay was granted to assessee till constitution of Tribunal. There is no provision to require petitioner to deposit any sum in respect of imposition of penalty, entirely disputed by him in a situation where he cannot prefer and prosecute appeal as Tribunal has not been constituted.

An unconditional stay was also granted in Balaram Halder Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. - 2025 (1) TMI 1199 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT. [Also see: Amit Kumar Singh Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Cossipur Charge & Ors. - 2024 (7) TMI 165 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ; Jaskaran Lunawat Versus State of West Bengal & Ors. - 2024 (1) TMI 571 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ; M/s. Usha Martin Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Jamshedpur - 2023 (5) TMI 719 - CESTAT KOLKATA]

In Shampoorji Pallonji Energy Integrated Solutions Pvt. Ltd., S.P. Armada Oil Exploration Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India - 2024 (12) TMI 1003 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT, A classification made by petitioner was accepted by first appellate authority under Heading No. 9973 but department could not challenged appellate authority's order as Tribunal was not functioning. Another show cause notice was issued by department again insisting that petitioner should have classified its service under Heading No. 9988, it was held that was to be adjudicated but not to be disposed of by making a final order until order of appellate authority was set aside or stayed.

In M/s GOODLUCK INDIA LIMITED Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - 2025 (2) TMI 248 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT, assessee challenged the appellate order issued under section 107 by way of a writ petition which could not be entertained in view of the alternate remedy available to assessee under section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017. The appellate order demanded to pre-deposit 25% of disputed tax amount to prefer an appeal before Appellate Tribunal. The court denied to entertain the writ as alternate remedy was available and held that issue of pre-deposit could be considered by the Tribunal [Also see:

***************

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles