BharatTaxGST

Ghanashyam Das vs. Chief Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Odisha, Kataka

Original PDF →
WP(C)/29721/2026HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01070671202623 September 2026Bench: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI,MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN3 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 29721 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010706712026 Ghanashyam Das ..…... Petitioner (s) Ms. Itishree Tripathy, Adv. -Versus- Chief Commissioner, State Tax, CT and GST, Odisha & Ors. .. .…. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

23.09.

2026 Order No.

01.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3.

In the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 05.06.2026/Annexure-1 passed by the Opposite Party No.3/Joint Commissioner, CT & GST Circle, Kendrapara, Odisha.

4.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in terms of Section 112 of the OGST Act, 2017, the Petitioner has preferred a second appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal on 28.06.2026. It is further submitted that in terms of the User Advisory issued by the GST Appellate Tribunal, upon depositing the mandatory pre- deposit of 10% of the disputed tax amount, the Petitioner has filed

the appeal which is presently pending adjudication before the Tribunal.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that the Opposite Party No.3, being neither the proper officer nor the competent authority to issue DRC-13 under Section 79 of the OGST Act, 2017, has issued the said DRC-13, i.e., the garnishee order against the Petitioner in purported violation of the provisions of Section 112(9) of the OGST Act, 2017, vide order dated 05.06.2026 under Annexure-1. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Petitioner approached the Opposite Parties seeking withdrawal of the DRC-13 dated 05.06.2026, vide letter dated 01.09.2026, enclosing the GST Tribunal Filing Acknowledgement dated 28.06.2026 along with the pre-deposit challan. However, the grievance of the Petitioner has not yet been considered.

7.

In view of the above and considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that since the recovery notice was issued on 05.06.2026, prior to the filing of the second appeal on 28.06.2026, the Petitioner is at liberty to approach the Authority concerned by filing an appropriate application invoking Section 112(9) of the OGST Act, 2017. In the event such an application is filed, the Authority concerned shall consider the same in the light of the provisions of Section 112(9) of the OGST Act, 2017 and dispose of the same, along with the application seeking withdrawal of the recovery proceedings initiated vide Form GST DRC-13 dated 05.06.2026, stated to have been filed on 17.08.2026, within a period of fifteen days from today by passing an appropriate order in accordance with law. It is further directed that, till disposal of the said applications, there shall not be any recovery proceeding against the Petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

Judge

( Murahari Sri Raman)

Judge Murmu

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.