Pre-deposit requirement under U.P. GST bars writ challenge to appellate order until mandatory deposits are made.

Where the U.P. GST appellate tribunal had not yet been constituted, writ petitions against first appellate orders were being entertained; however, statutory pre-deposit remained mandatory before appellate access could be invoked. In the absence of the deposits required under Section 112(8)(a) and (b), the High Court held that the writ petition was not entertainable at that stage. Time was granted to the petitioner to make the required deposit, reflecting that compliance with the pre-deposit condition is a prerequisite to pursuing the challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition could be entertained without the deposits required under Section 112(8)(a) and (b) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The appellate tribunal under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had not yet been constituted, so writ petitions against orders of the first appellate authority were being entertained. However, the petition before the Court was not accompanied by the statutory deposits required for invocation of the appellate remedy. In the absence of those deposits, the writ petition could not be entertained at that stage.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertainable without compliance with the pre-deposit requirement, and the petitioner was granted time to make the deposit.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute prescribes pre-deposit conditions for appellate access, a writ petition challenging the appellate order is not entertainable unless those mandatory deposits are made.

---