Hemant Prabhudas Vastani
Executive Summary – GSTAT Minutes of Meeting dated 10 June 2026
The Goods & Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) held its 3rd and 4th meetings of the “Committee for Resolution of Representations received from various Trade / Bar Associations” on 29 May 2026 and 1 June 2026 under the chairmanship of Hon’ble Justice Dr. Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, President, GSTAT.
The Committee reviewed several representations from trade bodies, professionals, and stakeholders regarding the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025 and proposed multiple amendments to simplify procedures, reduce technical litigation, and improve ease of filing and functioning before GSTAT vide F. No. GSTAT/ Pr. Bench Jurisdiction/2026-27/173 Date 10-June-2026.
Key Recommendations and Decisions
1. Relaxation in Certified Copy Requirements
The Committee recommended easing the requirement of certified copies by:
- allowing authentication by parties themselves or their authorised representatives;
- permitting filing without certified copies where the impugned order is already uploaded on the GST portal.
This is expected to significantly reduce procedural hardship and delays in appeal filing.
2. Clarification on Filing Procedures
Rule 15(b) is proposed to be amended to clarify that filing procedures shall be notified by the Registrar as directed by the Tribunal.
3. Electronic Filing and Documentation
The Committee recommended:
- all relevant documents should be filed online;
- documents should be duly paged, indexed, and electronically verified.
This reinforces the move toward a fully digital GSTAT process.
4. Single Verification for Appeal Filing
A major simplification proposed is insertion of a note under Rule 22 providing that a single verification in Form APL-05 confirming correctness of facts, grounds, and annexures would suffice for filing appeals.
This proposal was approved by majority vote (5:1).
5. Translation Requirement Relaxed
The Committee proposed that the Bench may relax the requirement of English translations of documents in appropriate cases. It also recommended omission of Rule 23(2), which previously prevented listing of matters until translations were filed.
This will help reduce procedural delays in multilingual cases.
6. More Time for Defect Rectification
The Committee proposed substantial changes in Rule 24 relating to scrutiny of appeals:
- time for removal of defects increased from 7 working days to 15 working days;
- Registrar may allow extensions up to 45 days;
- matters with unresolved defects will be placed before the Bench instead of outright rejection.
This amendment is taxpayer-friendly and reduces the risk of dismissal on technical grounds.
7. Interlocutory Applications Expanded
Rule 29 is proposed to be widened to specifically permit applications for:
- restoration,
- interim reliefs,
- stay,
- condonation,
- rectification,
- early hearing, etc.
Further, interlocutory applications will not be mandatory merely for adjournment requests.
8. Flexibility for Replies and Rejoinders
The Committee recommended:
- allowing the Bench to extend time for filing replies;
- permitting rejoinders relating to cross-objections as well.
9. Weekly Cause List Instead of Daily Cause List
A significant procedural reform proposed is replacement of “daily cause list” with “weekly cause list”. Supplementary lists may still be issued where required.
This aims to provide better predictability and administrative efficiency for litigants and professionals.
10. Clarification on Non-Sitting of Tribunal
Where the Tribunal does not function due to holiday or unforeseen reasons, the Committee proposed that matters be automatically rescheduled appropriately in subsequent dates through revised cause lists.
11. No Amendment Recommended in Rectification Limitation
The Committee decided not to amend Rule 108(2) concerning limitation for rectification applications, observing that changing the limitation may create jurisdictional disputes because Section 113(3) of the CGST Act already prescribes the Tribunal’s time limit for rectification.
12. Recommendation for Rationalisation of Fees
Although the Committee stated that it has no jurisdiction to amend fee provisions prescribed under Rule 110(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017, it noted that GSTAT fees are comparatively higher than those of ITAT and CESTAT and suggested the Ministry of Finance may examine the issue.
Importantly, the Committee recommended that no fee should be payable for rectification applications filed under Section 112(10) of the CGST Act.
Overall Impact
The proposed amendments collectively aim to:
- reduce technical objections in appeal filing;
- simplify GSTAT procedures;
- encourage digital compliance;
- provide greater procedural flexibility;
- reduce unnecessary litigation;
- make GSTAT more accessible and taxpayer-friendly.
The recommendations indicate a clear intent by GSTAT to adopt a pragmatic and less technical approach in handling GST appeals.
