Case Details: Chinmay Khuntia Versus Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) (2025) 27 Centax 230 (Ori.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Arindam Sinha, ACTG. CJ. & M.S. Sahoo, J.
- Ms I. Tripathy, Adv. for the Petitioner.
- Shri D. Das, Adv. Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, an assessee under the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, challenged the order of the First Appellate Authority before the High Court due to the non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal. Relying on the precedent set in Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha, the petitioner contended that the appellate order could be stayed upon depositing 10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing the appeal and an additional 20% of the remaining disputed tax. However, citing recent notifications issued by the Central and State Governments, the petitioner sought a modification, reducing the latter deposit requirement to 10%.
High Court Held
The Hon’ble High Court held that the order of the First Appellate Authority shall remain stayed, subject to the petitioner depositing an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount over and above the 10% already deposited for filing the appeal. Accepting the petitioner’s contention regarding the revised notification, the Court disposed of the writ petition accordingly.
List of Cases Cited
- Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha — (2024) 19 Centax 232 (Ori.) — Followed [Para 3]
