Statutory Appellate Remedy required: petitioner must comply with Section 112(8) deposit condition and file appeal before GSTAT.

Where a statutory appellate forum (GSTAT) has been constituted and filing timelines notified, a writ petition seeking substantive adjudication is not maintainable; the proper remedy is to file an appeal before the GSTAT. The court held that even when writ jurisdiction was invoked earlier due to forum non functionality, the writ court will not ordinarily waive or relax statutory conditions attached to appeals; the petitioner was directed to comply with the deposit/payment requirement under Section 112(8) and to file the appeal within the notified window, with no opinion expressed on the merits of the underlying order.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a writ petition is maintainable when a statutory appellate forum under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GSTAT) has not been constituted or made functional; (ii) Whether the writ court can relieve the petitioner from complying with the payment/deposit conditions under sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the GST Act when the GSTAT is made functional and timelines for filing appeals are notified.

Issue (i): Maintainability of writ petition where GSTAT was not functional and later made functional.

Analysis: The Court noted that where a statutory forum for appeal exists, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not a substitute; however, writ relief has been permitted historically when the designated forum is not constituted or functional and a person would be rendered remediless. The record shows GSTAT has been made functional and the Central Government has notified timelines (S.O. No. 4220(E) dated 17.09.2025) together with user advisory timelines to enable filing of appeals before the GSTAT.

Conclusion: The writ petition is not maintainable for adjudication of the dispute on merits now that the statutory appellate forum (GSTAT) is functional and timelines for filing appeals have been notified; the writ petition is disposed directing the petitioner to approach the GSTAT.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ court may relax or set aside the payment/deposit conditions in sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the GST Act so as to enable filing of appeal without compliance.

Analysis: The Court observed that even where the writ jurisdiction is invoked because the forum was non-functional, the writ court cannot ordinarily permit departure from statutory conditions attached to filing appeals. With GSTAT now functional and notification of filing windows in place, the proper course is to ensure strict compliance with sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the GST Act (deposit/payment conditions) and to facilitate filing before the GSTAT in accordance with the notified timelines and portal guidance. The Court therefore directed the petitioner to deposit amounts required under sub-section (8) and to file the appeal within the specified timeline; the Court refrained from expressing any opinion on merits of the first appellate order.

Conclusion: The writ court will not relieve the petitioner from the deposit/payment conditions under Section 112(8); the petitioner is directed to comply with those conditions and file the appeal before the GSTAT within the notified timelines, whereupon the GSTAT shall entertain the appeal if found in order.

Final Conclusion: The dispute raised in the writ petition is to be adjudicated by the statutory appellate forum (GSTAT) now made functional; the writ petition is disposed with directions to comply with statutory deposit conditions and to file the appeal within the timelines notified by the Government and the GSTAT e-filing portal, without any expression on the merits of the underlying appellate order.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory appellate forum exists and is functional, the writ court should ordinarily refrain from deciding the substantive dispute and must ensure compliance with statutory conditions for filing appeals; the availability of an effective alternative remedy before the designated tribunal and notified timelines warrants disposal of the writ directing the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy.

---