Chhattisgarh HC Allows Taxpayer To Seek Relief Under CBIC Circular Meant For States Where GSTAT Is Not Operational

The Chhattisgarh High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed by Maa Shakambari Steel Ltd., allowing the company to seek protection from GST recovery proceedings by following a Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) circular that applies in cases where the GST Appellate Tribunal is not yet operational.

The matter came before Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey, who was hearing a challenge to an order passed by the State tax authorities under Section 107(11) of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, as well as a later order rejecting the company's rectification application under Section 161.

During the hearing, the petitioner relied on CBIC Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST dated July 11, 2024, which lays down the procedure to be followed where a taxpayer wishes to file an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal but the Tribunal has not yet come into operation.

The circular permits the taxpayer to deposit the statutory pre-deposit amount and file an undertaking stating that an appeal will be filed once the tribunal becomes functional. If those steps are taken, recovery of the remaining demand is to remain stayed under Section 112(9) of the CGST Act.

The company also referred to a notification dated September 17, 2025 issued by the Union government under Section 112 of the CGST Act, which provides that appeals may be filed before the Tribunal up to 30 June 2026 in cases where the order sought to be appealed against was communicated before 1 April 2026, while in other cases the appeal must be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order.

On this basis, the petitioner requested that the writ petition be disposed of with liberty to comply with the circular by filing the required undertaking and making the statutory pre-deposit. The state did not oppose the request.

Justice Pandey noted that the circular already contains clear guidelines for recovery of dues in situations where the first appeal has been decided but the appellate tribunal is yet to become operational, and observed that in view of this framework nothing further remained for adjudication in the writ proceedings.

The court therefore permitted the taxpayer company to file the required undertaking before the proper jurisdictional officer and to deposit the statutory pre-deposit under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act within 15 days from receipt of a copy of the order, if the amount has not already been deposited. Upon such compliance, recovery of the remaining demand will remain stayed in terms of Section 112(9) of the Act.

The Court also clarified that if the required amount is not deposited within the stipulated period, the order will lose its efficacy.

With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.

For Petitioner: Advocate Moulik Bhanshali on behalf of Vivek Chopda

For Respondent: Deputy Government Advocate Anuradha Jain, for State  Advocate Annapurna A Tiwari for Respondent No.3