M/S Heavy Engineering Corporation Co. vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation Co., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 19.09.2025 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Central GST, Raipur. This appellate order had dismissed the petitioner's appeal on grounds of limitation, without considering the merits. The original recovery order, dated 27.08.2024, was passed by the Assistant Commissioner for an amount of Rs. 92,95,093/- plus interest and penalty, allegedly without providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the original order as their company was not in operation and the premises were locked, despite the order being uploaded on the GST portal.

Held

The High Court held that while the Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is currently non-functional, a statutory remedy of appeal is available under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court noted the notification dated 17.09.2025 and the circular dated 11.07.2024, which provide a procedure for taxpayers to file appeals and make pre-deposits, even before the Tribunal becomes fully operational. The Court was informed that the appointment of a Vice President was imminent, suggesting the Tribunal would soon become functional. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition, deeming the alternative remedy efficacious. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appeal as per the circular and notification within the stipulated period. The Court directed that upon the Vice President taking office, all objections raised by the petitioner in their appeal would be considered and decided by the Appellate Tribunal in accordance with law. This order is subject to the petitioner's statutory compliance, including depositing the pre-deposit amount. If the petitioner fails to file the appeal within the prescribed period or fails to deposit the required amount, the respondent authorities would be at liberty to proceed with the recovery.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when a statutory remedy of appeal before the Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is available under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, despite the Tribunal being non-functional? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the appellate order was passed without considering the merits and that they were not afforded a proper opportunity of hearing. They sought to quash the recovery and appellate orders and requested a remand for a fair hearing. Revenue's contention: The respondents argued that the impugned order is challengeable before the appellate tribunal as provided under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017. They highlighted a notification dated 17.09.2025 and a circular dated 11.07.2024, which provide a mechanism for filing appeals and availing stay benefits, with a extended timeline for filing appeals until 30.06.2026.