GST Tribunal: Delhi High Court bars Appointment of Members without Prior Approval [Read Order]

GST Tribunal - Delhi High Court - Taxscan

While granting an interim order in a writ petition filed by the Bharatiya Vitta Salahkar Samiti & Anr, the Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to not proceed with the appointment of members to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Appellate Tribunal without prior intimation, till the next date.

An order passed by a division bench of Justices S Muralidhar and IS Mehta in petitions concerning the creation of the National Bench of the GSTAT at New Delhi.

The petitioners challenged the Central Government notification dated March 13, 2019, establishing the National Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) at New Delhi in terms of Section 109 of the CGST Act. The petition also assails Section 109 and Section 110 of the CGST Act and the corresponding provisions of the Delhi GST Act with respect to the constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal and qualifications of their members.

The Court passed the direction after an adjournment was sought by the Central Government when the matter was listed for final hearing.

“Considering that these matters were to be heard finally today an adjournment is sought, it is directed that the Respondents shall not, without prior intimation to this Court, proceed to appoint persons to the GST Appellate Tribunal till the next date.“, the Court stated.

According to the petitioners, Sections 109 and 110 are in gross violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Madras Bar Association I, II & III case, and are hence constitutionally invalid.

The Petition also states that the Sections do not provide for the appointment of Advocates as Judicial Member or for the appointment of other specialists such as Chartered Accountants as GSTAT members.

Furthermore, since the qualification for becoming a technical member is lesser than the qualification required in the case of the first appellate authority, the Sections are in gross violative of the rule of law.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
taxscan-loader