Allahabad High Court
M/S ASTROTALK SERVICES PVT. LTD.versusADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, GRADE-2 (APPEAL) AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The appeal is dismissed as the order is not within the GST Tribunal’s jurisdiction and the appellant must approach the single judge.
Summary
The appellant, M/s Astrotalk Services Pvt. Ltd., appealed to the Allahabad High Court against a single judge’s order dismissing its writ petition on the ground that the matter should be dealt with by the GST Tribunal. The appeal was filed 76 days after the order, but the court condoned the delay despite the appellant’s cursory reasons. The appellant argued that the order under challenge was not within the GST Tribunal’s appellate jurisdiction, particularly because it involved recovery of GST not appealable under Section 112 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017. The court held that if the order is indeed outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, the correct remedy is to raise the issue before the single judge, not through the present appeal. Consequently, the court found no basis to entertain the appeal and dismissed it, directing the appellant to approach the single judge with appropriate proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the order impugned in the writ petition is amenable to appellate jurisdiction before the GST Tribunal
- Whether the appeal filed after 76 days can be condoned
- Whether the appellant should seek relief from the single judge rather than the High Court
Legislation cited
- U.P. GST Act, 2017 — s. 112
Subjects
- GST
- Appellate jurisdiction
- Delay condonation
- Writ petition
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 339 of 2026
M/s Astrotalk Services Pvt. Ltd.
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal) and 3
others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Akhil Gupta, Ashish Malhotra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ramanand Pandey, A.C.S.C.
Chief Justice's Court
HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. This appeal is directed against order dated 07.01.2026, whereby learned
Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant on
account of the constitution of GST Tribunal while issuing directions to
ensure that the appellant is not prejudiced on account of relegating the
appellant to the remedy of appeal on account of pendency of the writ
petition.
2. The appeal is barred by 76 days. An application seeking condonation of
delay has been filed. Though the reasons indicated in the application are
very cursory and general in nature, looking to quantum of delay, the
application is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
3. Submissions have been made that the learned Single Judge was not
justified in relegating the appellant to remedy before the GST Tribunal,
inasmuch as the appellant besides questioning the order passed by the
respondent had questioned the recovery of GST amount against which no
appeal is maintainable under Section 112 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 and,
therefore, the issue as raised in the writ petition could not have been
relegated for determination by the GST Tribunal.
4. The plea which is now sought to be raised before this Court regarding
the order/action impugned before the learned Single Judge was not
amenable to appellate jurisdiction before the GST Tribunal, was required
to be raised before the learned Single Judge and as apparently the same
SPLAD No. 339 of 2026
2
was not raised as it is submitted that the order impugned was passed in
most of the pending matters which were filed during the period the GST
Tribunal had not been constituted.
5. Be that as it may, if the case of the petitioner is that the order/action
impugned in the writ petition was not amenable to appellate jurisdiction
before the GST Tribunal, the remedy open for the petitioner is not to
question the order impugned by way of present appeal but to bring the
said fact to the notice of the learned Single Judge which would require the
determination as to whether the plea as raised, has any substance or not.
6. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to entertain the
present appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed leaving it open for the
appellant to approach the learned Single Judge by way of appropriate
proceedings in accordance with law.
(Kshitij Shailendra,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.)
May 7, 2026
RK/AKShukla
Digitally signed by :-
ANIL KUMAR SHUKLA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…