2026 (7) TMI 359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ashutosh Mishra and Mr. Rupesh Dubey. For the Respondent No.2/ State of Maharashtra: Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Additional Government Pleader. ORDER (PER ADVAIT M. SETHNA,J.) :- 1. This Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, primarily, assailing Order-in-Appeal dated 22nd December 2025, passed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Appeal-I, Mumbai) i.e. Res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of CGST Act ('Appellate Tribunal' for short). In view thereof, the Petition is not maintainable. 5. At the outset, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Rungta, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has submitted that the Impugned Order dated 22nd December 2025 is bereft of reasons in as much as it has not considered nuanced submissions advanced on behalf of the Petitioner. In this context, he would submit that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngta would then urge that the Petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the statutory pre-deposit requirement by depositing the such amount with the Registry of this Court and submits that this Court may admit and hear the Writ Petition on merit. 9. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, we find force in the preliminary objection taken by Mr. Mishra ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reason, we find it appropriate to direct the Petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal by complying with the requirement of statutory pre-deposit and proceed with the Appeal in accordance with law. 11. In our view, there is no fetter legal or otherwise for the Appellate Tribunal now constituted and functional to delve into these issues as raised by the Petitioner, including that of revenue ....