Disposed¶23

Kelucharan Martha v. the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Cuttack

Orissa HC9 Oct 2025WP(C)/16204/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kelucharan Martha v. The Commissioner, CT & GST; High Court of Orissa, Cuttack; WP(C) No.16204 of 2025; Bench: Harish Tandon, Chief Justice and Murahari Sri Raman, Judge; order dated 09.10.2025. Keywords: GST Act 2017; Section 63 ex-parte adjudication; temporary ID 211900000725TMP; Rule 100(2); Section 161 rectification; Section 107 appeal limitation; non-communication of order; GST Helpdesk request; writ disposed as grievance redressed (appeal enabled and filed); no merits decided; no precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

During pendency, the portal was enabled permitting the petitioner to file the appeal, which was filed successfully; the purpose of the writ petition having been granted by the opposite parties, the writ petition stands disposed of without further orders, with no opinion expressed on the merits. ¶23

Kelucharan Martha Vs the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Cuttack — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.16204 of 2025

¶2

Kelucharan Martha … Petitioner

¶3

Ms. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, Advocate -Versus-

¶4

The Commissioner, CT & GST & … Opposite Parties another

¶5

Mr. Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel for CT & GST Organization

¶6

CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

¶8

Order No.

¶9

ORDER 09.10.2025

¶10

02. 1 . The petitioner, Works Contractor on the date of implementation of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was assigned with GSTIN 21ARWPM9944L1ZW, which got cancelled subsequently on consideration of his application as the business was discontinued. While the matter stood thus, an ex-parte adjudication order pertaining to the tax periods from July, 2017 to March, 2018 was passed on 19^th October, 2019 under Section 63 of the Central / Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short “the GST Act”) read with Rule 100(2) of the Goods and Services Tax Rules, creating a temporary ID, i.e. , 211900000725TMP. The said order was rectified invoking Section 161 of the GST Act on 17^th March, 2020 whereby the demand was modified.

¶11

2. Ms. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the order was not communicated personally and the same was stated to have been uploaded in the portal by creating a temporary ID, the petitioner

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

could not file appeal within the period stipulated under Section 107 of the GST Act. However, from its Banker the petitioner could come to know about the demand being raised under Section 63 of the GST Act. She would submit that when the petitioner made attempt to file appeal, the Helpdesk replied as follows:-

¶14

“ This is Helpdesk Automated Response Desk, confirming the receipt of your request.

¶15

Your Request ID G-2024013011769680 has been registered with us & Request Status is OPEN.

¶16

We are working on the issue reported and will update you soon.

¶17

Thanks & Regards,

¶18

GST Helpdesk”

¶19

2.1. She further submitted that since the petitioner was prevented to exhaust alternative remedy as made available to him under the statute, the present writ petition has been filed craving for indulgence.

¶20

3. When the matter was taken up on 23^rd September, 2025, learned Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Organization sought for accommodation to obtain instructions. Accordingly, the matter stood adjourned to this date.

¶21

4. Today, Ms. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that during pendency of this writ petition, the portal is enabled to allow the petitioner to file appeal and, accordingly, the appeal could be filed by the petitioner successfully. In view of such, she submitted that there remains no grievance as the purpose of filing the writ petition, has been granted by the opposite parties.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

5. In view of such conceded position, this writ petition stands disposed of without requiring any further order to be passed. It is made clear that this Court has expressed no opinion on the merits of the case. All pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶24

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman)

Judge

MRS/Laxmikant

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANORANJAN SAMAL Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Oct-2025 16:58:36

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Kelucharan Martha v. the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kelucharan Martha v. the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raps Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Odisha

Chittaranjan Sahoo Vs Chairman Cum Managing Director, Optcl

Rabindra Nayak Vs the Principal Commissioner, Cgst and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar

Gangadhar Kaushalya Vs State of Odisha

M/S. D.K. Engineering and Construction, Balangir Vs Chief Commissioner of Ct and Gst, Cuttack

Balabhadra Behera Vs State of Odisha