The Orissa High Court has held that a person cannot steal a march by taking shelter in the fact that there is no inhibition in the writ court to entertain the petition and pass an order departing from the statutory appeal provision.
The Court clarified that since the forum, i.e., the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has already been provided in the statute, which is now made functional and the period for filing the appeal has been extended in a fragmented manner, it would not be proper for the Writ court to keep such writ petitions pending as the dispute can be adjudicated by the said forum.
Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit the amount if not already deposited, as required under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act, and file an appeal as per the timeline given in the ‘User advisory for the GSTAT e-filing portal’.
The Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman observed that the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance issued a Notification being S.O. No. 4220(E) dated 17th September, 2025 providing an opportunity to an aggrieved person to file an appeal in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017.
Accordingly, to facilitate smooth filing of an appeal before the GSTAT, a ‘User advisory for the GSTAT e-filing portal’ is also issued by the authorities, containing the timeline within which the appeal can be filed before the GSTAT.
The Bench pointed out that the Writ court can be approached assailing an order for which the forum of appeal is provided, and the same is entertainable in the event the forum is not made functional or constituted, as the person cannot be rendered remediless.
However, the Writ Court shall ensure strict compliance thereof, as a person cannot steal a march by taking shelter that there is no inhibition in the writ court in entertaining the writ petition and passing an order taking departure from the said statutory provision, added the Bench.
Briefly, the petitioner has challenged the order passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, contending that although the remedy by way of an appeal is provided under Section 112 of the CGST Act before the Appellate Tribunal, such remedy is not available as the GSTAT has not been constituted and made functional, and, therefore, an aggrieved person cannot be rendered remediless.
Appearances:
Advocate Prabodha Chandra Nayak, for the Petitioner/ Taxpayer
Advocates Sunil Mishra and Sourav Tibrewal, for the Respondent/ Revenue
