Interest on GST Refund: Jharkhand HC Refuses Writ Jurisdiction as Appeal Lies before GSTAT [Read Order]
The high court clarified that since the petitioner’s claim was confined to interest on an already granted refund, there would be no requirement of pre-deposit for filing an appeal before the Tribunal.
![Interest on GST Refund: Jharkhand HC Refuses Writ Jurisdiction as Appeal Lies before GSTAT [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2026/02/20/2126484-interest-on-gst-refund-jarkhand-hc-refuses-writ-jurisdiction-appeal-lies-gstat-taxscan.webp "Interest on GST Refund: Jharkhand HC Refuses Writ Jurisdiction as Appeal Lies before GSTAT [Read Order]")
The Jharkhand High Court has declined to entertain a writ petition seeking interest on GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) refund, holding that the statutory remedy of appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) is available and must be used. Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar dismissed the petition filed by M/s CJ DARCL Logistics Limited, observing that once...
The Jharkhand High Court has declined to entertain a writ petition seeking interest on GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) refund, holding that the statutory remedy of appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) is available and must be used.
Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar dismissed the petition filed by M/s CJ DARCL Logistics Limited, observing that once the impugned order is appealable before the Tribunal, the High Court would not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The petitioner had approached the High Court seeking interest on a refund that had already been sanctioned under the GST Act.
During the hearing, the GST department submitted to the court that although the GSTAThas started accepting filings, judicial hearings have not commenced due to vacancies.
The respondents added that steps are being taken to fill up the vacancies so that the Tribunal can function fully.
The Court, therefore held that mere delay in full operationalisation of the Tribunal does not justify bypassing the statutory appellate mechanism.
The high court clarified that since the petitioner’s claim was confined to interest on an already granted refund, there would be no requirement of pre-deposit for filing an appeal before the Tribunal.
The petitioner asserted that considerable time had already been spent in litigation and therefore the writ should be entertained. The Court said that statutory alternate remedies cannot be bypassed on such grounds.
The court while disposing of the petition, directed the petitioner to file an appeal before appellate tribunal within 4 weeks and ordered that the same shall be heard without raising limitation issue.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
