CHENNAI GSTAT Clarifies: Appeal Under Section 112 Cannot Be Filed Before Section 107 Order

Introduction

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has examined an important issue concerning the timing of an appeal under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act).

The question before the Bench was whether an aggrieved person can file an appeal before the GSTAT before an order is passed by the First Appellate Authority under Section 107 or 108 of the CGST Act.

In the matter concerning Filing No. 2026133/10100/0064, the Appellant had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority in APL-01 and also filed an appeal before the GSTAT in APL-05 on the same day, i.e., 19 March 2026. The Appellant explained that the GSTAT appeal was filed because the Department had initiated recovery proceedings.

However, the First Appellate Authority subsequently rejected the appeal through APL-02 on 24 June 2026.

The GSTAT held that the appeal filed before it on 19 March 2026 was premature because, on that date, there was no order under Section 107 or 108 against which an appeal under Section 112 could be filed.

Facts of the Case

The matter was taken up by the Bench under Filing No. 2026133/10100/0064.

The authorised representative of the Applicant/Appellant and the representative of the State Government were present before the Tribunal.

The Appellant submitted the paper book and relevant enclosures and contended that:

• An appeal had been filed before the First Appellate Authority in APL-01.

• An appeal had also been filed before the GSTAT through APL-05.

• Both appeals were filed on 19 March 2026.

• The GSTAT appeal was filed because the Department was undertaking recovery proceedings.

The State Government representative, on the other hand, relied upon the submissions dated 28 July 2026 and specifically drew the Bench's attention to the fact that the First Appellate Authority had subsequently rejected the appeal through APL-02 dated 24 June 2026.

Defect Raised by the GSTAT Registry

The Registry of the Bench raised an important defect concerning the maintainability of the appeal.

The appeal before the GSTAT had been filed on 19 March 2026, whereas the order of the First Appellate Authority rejecting the appeal was passed only later, on 24 June 2026.

Thus, at the time when the GSTAT appeal was filed, there was no order passed under Section 107 or Section 108 of the CGST Act.

The Bench therefore had to determine whether such an appeal could be maintained.

Legal Issue Before the Tribunal

The principal question considered by the Bench was:

Can an aggrieved person file an appeal before the GSTAT under Section 112 of the CGST Act in the absence of an order passed under Section 107 or Section 108?

The answer depended upon the interpretation of Section 112(1) of the CGST Act, 2017.

Section 112(1) provides, in substance, that a person aggrieved by an order passed against him under Section 107 or Section 108 may appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against such order.

The statutory provision therefore contemplates the existence of an appealable order before an appeal is filed before the Appellate Tribunal.

Tribunal's Analysis

The Bench examined the chronology of events.

1. GSTAT appeal was filed on 19 March 2026

The Appellant filed Filing No. 2026133/10100/0064 before the GSTAT on 19 March 2026.

However, on that date, the First Appellate Authority had not yet passed any order on the appeal.

2. First Appellate Authority's order came later

The First Appellate Authority, namely the Deputy Commissioner, CT Appeals, subsequently rejected the appeal through APL-02 dated 24 June 2026.

Therefore, the order under the appellate proceedings came into existence after the GSTAT appeal had already been filed.

3. Section 112 requires an existing order

The Bench observed that Section 112(1) permits an appeal against an order passed under Section 107 or 108.

Accordingly, the existence of such an order is a necessary foundation for an appeal under Section 112.

Since there was no order under Section 107 or 108 on 19 March 2026, the appeal filed on that date did not satisfy the requirement of Section 112(1).

Finding of the GSTAT

The GSTAT held that Filing No. 2026133/10100/0064 was not in accordance with Section 112(1) of the CGST Act, 2017.

The crucial reasoning was that:

The First Appellate Authority's order was not in existence when the appeal before the GSTAT was filed.

The subsequent passing of the APL-02 order on 24 June 2026 could not retrospectively validate the GSTAT appeal that had already been filed on 19 March 2026.

The question before the Bench was therefore decided against the Applicant/Appellant.

Appeal Dismissed With Liberty to File Fresh Appeal

Although the GSTAT found the appeal to be not maintainable, it did not prevent the Appellant from approaching the Tribunal again in accordance with law.

The appeal was dismissed with liberty to the Applicant/Appellant to file an appeal before the GSTAT, if they so desire, in accordance with law.

This distinction is important.

The dismissal was based on the premature filing of the appeal, rather than an adjudication of the substantive merits of the underlying dispute.

GST Case Law Pankajam Plastics Versus Muthiah Athinarayanan (GSTAT Chennai Judgement)

Citation-2026 TAXONATION 2262 (GSTAT CHENNAI)

Need to Draft GST Notices or GSTAT Appeals in Seconds?

Why spend hours researching and drafting when AI can do it in seconds?

Taxonation.ai is an AI-powered GST legal assistant trained on Taxonation's extensive proprietary database of GST case laws, notifications, circulars, Acts, and Rules. Whether you need to prepare a reply to a GST notice, draft a GSTAT appeal, search relevant case laws, or analyse complex GST issues, Taxonation.ai helps you generate accurate, well-structured drafts within seconds.

Experience faster GST research and drafting with Taxonation.ai and focus more on strategy than paperwork.

Visit: www.taxonation.ai