Whether High Court Can Continue to Hear a GST Matter After Constitution of GSTAT Instead of Relegating the Assessee to the Tribunal?

What is the wrong if the High Court directs to avail the remedy at GSTAT? First of all High Court is not fact finidng authrotiy. Conversly GSTAT is the final fact finding authority. The only burden would be you have to comply the requirements of prescribed predeposit before the GSTAT.

Yes, an SLP can be filed. But if the objective is to obtain the best practical result, I would not lead with a prayer asking the Supreme Court to itself adjudicate the GST dispute.

I would frame the case as:

The assessee was not voluntarily bypassing GSTAT. GSTAT did not exist/function when the writ was instituted. The High Court itself entertained the writ. The assessee diligently prosecuted it. GSTAT subsequently became available. Relegating the assessee now without protecting limitation would deprive the assessee of an effective statutory remedy for a circumstance for which the assessee was not responsible.

Then seek:

Primary: High Court decide the writ because of the exceptional circumstances/advanced stage.

Alternative: permit GSTAT appeal and expressly protect/exclude the writ-pendency period for limitation.

Further alternative: direct GSTAT to decide the limitation/exclusion application sympathetically and grant priority/interim relief.

And importantly, if the High Court has not yet passed the order, I would first obtain a carefully worded High Court disposal order protecting the GSTAT remedy. That is likely to be much more effective than having to repair the limitation problem later through an SLP.

There is no blanket answer to all situations. It is fact specific. What is your issue, why HC has not entertained the Writ, etc. Suggest that you consult an expert in this regard.

Yes, a High Court may continue hearing a GST matter after GSTAT is consted, but must first ensure the assessee has exhausted the statutory remedy.

Legal Framework:

CGST Act Section 109: GSTAT constitution

CGST Act Section 112: Statutory appeal route to GSTAT

Article 226: High Court writ jurisdiction (discretionary)

Case Law:

Sona Enterprise (2026 (9) TMI 531 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT): Writ-pending period is excluded from limitation for GSTAT appeal

Tiwari Furniture (2024 (3) TMI 897 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT): Writ becomes non-maintainable once GSTAT functional

Associates Fair Deal (2026 (9) TMI 724 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT): High Court examines alternative remedy as threshold question

Limitation Protection: If writ filed before GSTAT constitution, the pending writ period cannot be counted against limitation periods for the GSTAT appeal.

Practical Approach:

File GSTAT appeal under Section 112 immediately (3 months limit)

File appeal within limitation period to protect your rights

High Court will likely direct you to exhaust statutory remedy first

Raise same grounds in GSTAT appeal

Do NOT wait for High Court decision - file GSTAT appeal promptly to preserve limitation rights. The High Court's writ jurisdiction is discretionary when efficacious statutory remedy (GSTAT appeal) is available.

Key Strategy: File GSTAT appeal immediately, then seek continuity/priority relief from High Court regarding the writ petition.

High Court's Order is correct in letter and spirit of GST laws. No use of opting for challenging the High Court Order in the Supreme Court.

Challenging the High Court's Order in this scenario, tantamounts to challenging the jurisdiction of High Court.

Filing an appeal with GSTAT is the best option from all aspects.