Delhi High Court Disposes GST Writ Petitions On Pre-Deposit And Binding Effect Of Aakash Gupta Judgment

The Case

JASMEET SINGH Vs OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CGST DELHI NORTH & ORS.
Case No.: W.P.(C)/13583/2026
Decided on: 09/17/2026
CNR: DLHC010441562026 ·
High Court of Delhi

The Legal Issue

The Court considered whether the petitioner is entitled to file the appeal without insisting upon pre-deposit as the proceedings were initiated before 01.10.2025, and whether directions should be issued to the authorities to start following judgments passed by this Court. Both contentions were raised against the Order in Appeal dated 12.12.2026 passed by the first Appellate Authority. The Court also noted that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal before the GSTAT.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing of the Order in Appeal dated 12.12.2026 passed by the first Appellate Authority. Admittedly, the Petitioner has alternative remedy of appeal before the GSTAT against the Order in Appeal. The learned Senior counsel representing the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is entitled to file the appeal without insisting upon pre-deposit as the proceedings were initiated before 01.10.2025, and that he is squarely covered by the judgment passed in W.P.(C) No.12808/2028 titled as Aakash Gupta v. Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal & Anr. and others connected cases decided on 14.09.2026. Various Writ Petitions involving identical issues were disposed of by a common order, with facts considered from W.P.(C) 13583/2026. The Court heard the matter and reserved the order.

Summary of the Decision

The Court held that as far as the first issue is concerned, the matter is covered by the judgment passed in Aakash Gupta’s case (supra). As to the second argument, the Court did not find it appropriate to issue any direction as Article 141 of the Constitution of India is amply clear. With these observations, the Writ Petition was hereby disposed of. The order was passed by ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. and SHAIL JAIN, J. on SEPTEMBER 17, 2026. The Court did not quash the Order in Appeal and left the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy before the GSTAT.

This digest is for quick reference only and is not legal advice. Always verify against the full judgment.