M/S Shri Shyam Metals (INDIA) vs. Assistant Commissioner, Central GST East Division & Ors.
Held
The Court held that in terms of Circular No. 224/18/2024 - GST dated July 11, 2024, the demand would automatically be stayed upon the payment of the pre-deposit by the Petitioner. The Court also noted that upon the constitution and commencement of functioning of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the Petitioner is free to file an appeal challenging the impugned Order-in-Appeal. Regarding the challenge to the vires of Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated December 28, 2023, the Court stated that any order passed by the GST Appellate Tribunal shall be subject to the outcome of the decision of the Supreme Court in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax &Ors. The Court disposed of the petition on these terms.
Facts
The Petitioner, M/s Shri Shyam Metals (India), filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Appeal dated May 13, 2025, passed by the Additional Commissioner, COST Appeals-1, Delhi. This Order-in-Appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original dated April 30, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST. The Petitioner has already made a pre-deposit of 10% of the demand raised. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated December 28, 2023. The Petitioner has made the pre-deposit as per Circular No. 224/18/2024 - GST dated July 11, 2024.
Key Issues
1. Whether the demand raised by the revenue is automatically stayed upon the payment of the pre-deposit, in terms of Circular No. 224/18/2024 - GST dated July 11, 2024? (Question of law) 2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to challenge the impugned Order-in-Appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal upon its constitution and commencement of functioning? (Question of law) 3. Whether the impugned Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated December 28, 2023, is valid? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner argued that the pre-deposit of 10% of the demand has been made, and in terms of the relevant circular, the demand should automatically be stayed. The Petitioner also contended that they should be permitted to file an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal once it is functional. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the Respondent revenue.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 129, Rule 86A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- M/s Shri Shyam Metals (India) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 13th May, 2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner, COST Appeals-1, Delhi (hereinafter 'impugned OIA'). The appeal decided in the impugned OIA was filed challenging the impugned Order-in-Original dated 30th April, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST (hereinafter 'impugned OIO'), which has also been challenged by the Petitioner in the present petition.
Mr. Verma, ld. Counsel, submits that the pre-deposit constituting 10% of the demand raised has already been made by the
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.