Karnataka High Court Permits Exit from GST Writ in View of Functional GST Appellate Tribunal

The decision in Calcutta Tube Centre Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Karnataka High Court), Writ Petition No. 26584 of 2023 (T-RES), dated 17/07/2026, clarifies the approach of the Karnataka High Court where an assessee had directly invoked writ jurisdiction in the absence of a functional Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), and later sought to withdraw the writ once GSTAT became operational.

This order is especially relevant for assessees who approached the High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India due to the non-constitution of GSTAT, and who may now wish to migrate to the statutory appellate mechanism provided under the GST laws.

Background of the Dispute

Challenge to Penalty and Appellate Order

The assessee, Calcutta Tube Centre, had filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court questioning, among other issues, an appellate order passed under Section 107 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The underlying controversy stemmed from a GST penalty, reflected in Form GST MOV-09, which is typically associated with detention, seizure and release of goods/vehicles in transit under the GST framework. The assessee sought interference of the High Court against the appellate order of the Commercial Tax authority (Respondent No. 1).

Absence of Functional GSTAT When Writ Was Filed

At the time the writ petition was instituted:

  • Sections 109 and 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 already contemplated a statutory appellate forum, namely the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT).
  • However, despite this statutory framework, GSTAT had not yet been constituted and was not functioning.
  • In the absence of an operative appellate tribunal, the assessee had no effective statutory remedy against the impugned appellate order.

Considering this vacuum in the appellate structure, the assessee chose to move the High Court under its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Memo for Withdrawal: Shift from Writ to Statutory Appeal

Assessee’s Request to Withdraw

During the pendency of the writ petition, counsel representing the assessee submitted a formal memo before the Karnataka High Court. Through this memo, it was conveyed that: