Supreme Court Permits GSTAT Appeal Without Pre-Deposit Pending Special Leave Petition Determination

By | September 22, 2026
0 Comment

Supreme Court Permits GSTAT Appeal Without Pre-Deposit Pending Special Leave Petition Determination

Supreme Court Permits GSTAT Appeal Without Pre-Deposit Pending Special Leave Petition Determination

Issue

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable to bypass the alternative statutory remedy under Section 112 of the CGST Act, and whether an appellate tribunal can be directed to entertain an appeal without pre-deposit during the pendency of a Special Leave Petition.

Facts

  • The assessee, a GST-registered construction contractor, was investigated for alleged irregular input tax credit, culminating in a penalty imposed via an Order-in-Original.
  • An appeal filed before the first appellate authority was dismissed on the ground of limitation.
  • The assessee approached the High Court via a writ petition, challenging the adjudicating officer’s jurisdiction and alleging a breach of principles of natural justice.
  • The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that an efficacious statutory remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) under Section 112 was available, and writ jurisdiction could not be invoked merely to bypass pre-deposit requirements or alternative remedies.
  • Aggrieved by the High Court’s order, the assessee filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court entertained the matter and issued formal notice in the Special Leave Petition.
  • The assessee was explicitly granted permission to file an appeal before the GSTAT.
  • The GSTAT was directed to entertain and process the appeal without insisting on the mandatory statutory pre-deposit.
  • The interim protection allowing the appeal without pre-deposit was made expressly subject to the final outcome of the pending SLP.

Keyakeaways

  • Enforceability of Alternative Remedies: High Courts consistently decline to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when a statutory appellate forum like the GSTAT is available under Section 112, barring litigants from bypassing pre-deposit mandates.
  • Supreme Court’s Interim Relief Powers: The Apex Court can invoke its discretionary powers to shield taxpayers from rigid pre-deposit conditions by allowing tribunal filings to proceed subject to the outcome of ongoing litigation.
  • Balancing Compliance and Justice: Permitting statutory appeals without pre-deposit during a pending SLP ensures that access to justice is not foreclosed by financial preconditions while complex legal questions remain sub judice.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PVCON Engineering Co.
v.
CGST and Central Excise, Bhopal
K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli, JJ.
SLP to Appeal (C) No(s). 28059 of 2026†
SEPTEMBER  7, 2026
Abhishek Garg, AOR, Yash Gaiha, Ranesh Singh Mankotia and Naman Mehta, Advs. for the Petitioner. V. Chandrashekara Bharathi, Adv. for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. Application for exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned judgment is allowed.
2. Heard Mr. Abhishek Garg, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. V.Chandrashekara Bharathi, learned counsel appearing on advance notice for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case, a Show Cause Notice was issued on 26th July, 2024 and the Order-in-Original was passed on 3rd October, 2024. Learned counsel submits that the amendment prescribing pre-deposit came into effect only from 1st October, 2025. Learned counsel submits that in view of that, the condition of pre-deposit cannot be a condition for filing further appeal in this case before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short,”GSTAT”). Learned counsel also submits that the Show Cause Notice was not issued by a proper officer.
4. Issue notice.
5. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal before the GSTAT and the appeal shall be entertained without a pre-deposit. However, this will be subject to the outcome of the present petition.
6. Tag with M.M. Traders v. State of U.P.   (SC)/SLP (Civil) Diary No.28833 of 2026.