Statutory appellate remedy under GST cannot be denied on maintainability when the court has already directed recourse to appeal.

Where a petitioner was earlier directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, the appellate authority could not later reject the appeal as premature or not maintainable. The High Court held that the maintainability-based dismissal was unsustainable because the dispute had to be examined on merits in light of the earlier direction to avail the appellate remedy. The order was set aside and the matter remanded to the appellate authority for fresh decision on merits without raising any objection as to maintainability.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the appeal as premature or not maintainable after the Court had directed the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and whether the matter required reconsideration on merits.

Analysis: The petitioner had challenged recovery action taken in connection with alleged tax liability and had earlier been directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. The appellate authority nevertheless rejected the appeal on maintainability. In view of the earlier direction to avail the appellate remedy, the maintainability-based rejection could not be sustained, and the dispute required examination on merits by the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The order dismissing the appeal on maintainability was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for decision on merits without raising any objection as to maintainability.

---