M/S Gm Sons vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Gm Sons, through its partner Aditya Malge, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petition challenged an order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The State, represented by the Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax/GST, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) and Assistant Commissioner, CGST, were the respondents. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute were not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that an interim relief had been granted earlier.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. The reasoning was based on the submission made by the learned Panel Lawyer for the State, who pointed out that the impugned order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, is appealable before the GST Tribunal in accordance with Section 112 of the Act. The ratio decidendi is that statutory remedies must be exhausted before approaching the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The Court disposed of the petition by reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to prefer a duly constituted appeal before the GST Tribunal within 30 days from the date of the order. The Tribunal was directed to decide the appeal within 60 days objectively and in accordance with law. The interim relief granted earlier was directed to continue until the disposal of the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable before the High Court when an appeal lies before the GST Tribunal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, challenging an order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition. Revenue's Contention: The State argued that the impugned order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) is appealable before the GST Tribunal as per Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CGHC010529162025
2026:CGHC:39212
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 205 of 2025 1 - M/s Gm Sons Through Its Partner, Aditya Malge, S/o Vijay Malge, Aged About 35 Years, R/o House No. 427, Lalu Ram Colony, Korba District Korba (C.G.)
... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Commercial Tax/ Gst, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Joint Commissioner (Appeal) State Tax Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Assistant Commissioner, Circle Ii, C.G. Good And Service Tax, Korba Division, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Soni, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board 07.09.2026
Heard.
Mr. Kumrani, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would submit that the impugned order passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) under the provisions of Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 is appealable before the GST Tribunal in accordance with the provisions of Section 112 of the Act of 2017 and, therefor
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.