The GSTAT Ghaziabad Bench has dismissed three departmental appeals at the threshold stage itself, holding that the disputed amounts of Rs. 1,98,806, Rs. 88,074 and Rs. 1,90,080 respectively fell below the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 20,00,000 for departmental appeals before the GSTAT, and that the Revenue had failed to establish the applicability of any recognised exception to the limit. The orders by Member (Judicial) Sanjay Kumar Chandhariyavi and Member (Technical) Sungita Sharma in APL/D34, D35 and D36/GZB/2026 (decided 17.09.2026) lay down what is among the most comprehensive GSTAT jurisprudence on Section 120, the binding nature of departmental litigation policy, and the distinction between administrative authorisation to file an appeal and compliance with the statutory monetary threshold framework.
The Tribunal held: (a) maintainability must be determined before merits — the Tribunal cannot first adjudicate the merits and then determine whether the appeal was entitled to enter the process; (b) the Commissioner’s administrative permission to file an appeal is not the same as establishing that the case falls within a recognised exception — a generic approval cannot be elevated into a statutory exception; (c) once the disputed amount is shown to be below the threshold, the burden lies on the Revenue to disclose which exception is invoked, what facts bring the case within it, and what recorded opinion of the Commissioner supports the invocation; (d) the Department cannot simultaneously invoke a litigation-control mechanism when convenient and disregard it when an adverse order is passed. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court’s decisions in Vikram Cement (2026), SRMB Dairy Farming, Balaji Overseas, Ganga Bai, and Ranadey Micronutrients.
- 2026-juristway.com-2568-GSTAT(Ghaziabad)-GST; 2569; 2570 | GSTAT Ghaziabad Bench | APL/D34, D35 & D36/GZB/2026 | 17.09.2026