Jps Traders vs. Appellate Authority

Held

The Court held that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of filing a regular appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal, which has now become functional. Consequently, the Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the present writ petition. The Court further observed that the period from June 21, 2025, until the date of the order, during which the petitioner was pursuing the writ petition, shall not impede their application for condonation of delay before the GST Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal is directed to consider this period when deciding on the condonation of delay, in accordance with the law. No specific issues regarding the merits of the GST orders were decided.

Facts

The petitioner, JPS Traders, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging orders passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the GST Act for different assessment years. The petition was filed on June 21, 2025. At the time of filing, the GST Appellate Tribunal was not functional. However, the Tribunal has since become functional. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition to pursue a regular appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy available before the GST Appellate Tribunal, given that it has now become functional. 2. Whether the period spent by the petitioner in pursuing the writ petition before the High Court should be considered for condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that since the GST Appellate Tribunal was not functional at the time of filing the writ petition, approaching the High Court was necessary. Now that the Tribunal is functional, they wish to withdraw the writ petition and file an appeal there. They also contended that the time spent pursuing the writ petition should be considered for condonation of delay. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent/State. However, the Court's observation implies that the existence of a functional GST Appellate Tribunal provides an alternative remedy.