High Court Declines to Entertain GST Writ Due to Availability of Tribunal Remedy

The petitioner, M/s Jaiswal Foot Wear through its proprietor Raj Kumar Jaiswal, challenged the appellate order dated 16.05.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeal), Ayodhya, affirming the order of the adjudicating authority. The writ petition was filed directly before the High Court seeking interference with the appellate decision.

The State submitted that an effective statutory remedy of second appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal was available.  The State further relied upon Notification dated 17 September 2025 issued under Section 112(1) of the CGST Act, notifying 30 June 2026 as the extended date for filing appeals before the Tribunal in specified cases.

Main Issue: Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition against a GST appellate order when an effective statutory remedy of appeal before the Tribunal is available and limitation stands extended.

HC Held: The High Court held that since the GST Appellate Tribunal has now been constituted and the petitioner has an adequate alternative statutory remedy, it would not be appropriate to entertain the writ petition. The Court noted that, in terms of the Notification dated 17 September 2025, appeals before the Tribunal can be filed up to 30 June 2026 in eligible cases, thereby safeguarding limitation concerns.

Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy, leaving it open to the petitioner to file a second appeal before the Tribunal. The Court clarified that it had not examined the merits of the case and that the Tribunal shall decide the appeal independently in accordance with law.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below