The composition of GSTAT was one of the most debated aspects of India’s GST infrastructure. The original CGST Act proposed 1 Judicial Member and 2 Technical Members per bench-a composition that was challenged in the Madras High Court as unconstitutional because it gave administrative members a voting majority over judicial members. The GST Council’s Group of Ministers restructured the composition to ensure judicial balance: 2 Judicial Members + 2 Technical Members per State Bench, and a retired Supreme Court Judge or High Court Chief Justice as President.
This composition is not academic-it directly affects how your appeal is decided. A bench with strong judicial members will apply legal principles rigorously. A bench with experienced technical members will understand the practical realities of GST compliance. Together, they produce orders that are both legally sound and practically sensible. This guide explains who these members are, how they are appointed, what powers they have, and why the composition matters for your specific appeal.
For the complete GSTAT bench directory, see our GSTAT State Benches guide (know more). For the Principal Bench’s specific jurisdiction, see our Principal Bench guide (know more).
GSTAT Composition: The Complete Structure
| Role | Principal Bench (New Delhi) | State Bench (31 locations) |
|---|---|---|
| Presiding | President: Former SC Judge or HC Chief Justice. Appointed after CJI consultation. | Senior Judicial Member (no President at State Bench level) |
| Judicial Member(s) | 1 Judicial Member: Former HC Judge or qualified judicial officer with 10+ years experience. | 2 Judicial Members: Same eligibility as Principal Bench. |
| Technical Member (Centre) | 1 member: Retired IRS officer (Group A, 25+ years) or equivalent with GST/Customs/Excise experience. | 1 member: Same eligibility as Principal Bench. |
| Technical Member (State) | 1 member: Retired IAS/State Tax officer (equivalent rank) with state GST/VAT experience. | 1 member: Appointed by the respective State Government. |
| Total | 4 members (President + 1 Judicial + 2 Technical) | 4 members (2 Judicial + 2 Technical) |
| Quorum | President + 1 Judicial + 1 Technical = 3 (minimum) | 1 Judicial + 1 Technical = 2 (minimum for circuit sittings) |
The Four Member Roles: Detailed Comparison
1. President of GSTAT
| Parameter | Detail |
|---|---|
| Current holder | Justice (Retd) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra (appointed 6 May 2024) |
| Eligibility | Must be a former Supreme Court Judge or a former/sitting Chief Justice of a High Court. Must have served as HC Judge for at least 5 years. |
| Appointment | By the Central Government after consultation with the Chief Justice of India or CJI’s nominee. |
| Term | 3 years or until age 70, whichever is earlier. Eligible for reappointment. |
| Powers | Heads the Principal Bench. Administrative oversight of all 31 State Benches. Can transfer cases between benches. Issues practice directions. Determines cause list priority. Activates circuit benches based on appeal volume. |
| Why this matters | The President’s background (SC/HC) ensures the highest judicial standards. The administrative powers mean the President shapes how quickly and in what order cases are heard across all benches. |
2. Judicial Members
| Parameter | Detail |
|---|---|
| Number appointed (Apr 2026) | 52 Judicial Members across Principal + 31 State Benches |
| Eligibility | (a) Former High Court Judge, OR (b) District Judge or Additional District Judge with 10+ years judicial experience, OR (c) Qualified legal professional with 10+ years experience in taxation matters before courts/tribunals. |
| Appointment | By the Central Government after consultation with the Chief Justice of India or CJI’s nominee. This CJI consultation requirement ensures judicial independence. |
| Term | 4 years or until age 67, whichever is earlier. Eligible for reappointment. |
| Role in hearing | Ensures legal principles are correctly applied: interpretation of CGST Act sections, constitutional validity of provisions, application of judicial precedents (SC, HC, CESTAT), principles of natural justice, and procedural fairness. |
| Why this matters | Judicial Members bring courtroom discipline to GSTAT proceedings. They ensure that the department’s interpretation of law is tested against judicial standards, not just administrative convenience. The Sterling & Wilson judgment (by the judicial-led Principal Bench) established GSTAT’s factual evaluation power-a judicial determination. |
3. Technical Member (Centre)
| Parameter | Detail |
|---|---|
| Number appointed (Apr 2026) | 31 Technical Members (Centre) + 1 at Principal Bench = 32 total |
| Eligibility | Retired officer of Indian Revenue Service (Customs & Central Excise) or equivalent, Group A, with 25+ years service. Must have held the rank of Principal Commissioner / Chief Commissioner of Central Tax or equivalent. |
| Appointment | By the Central Government. No CJI consultation required (this is an executive appointment). |
| Term | 4 years or until age 67, whichever is earlier. |
| Role in hearing | Brings Central GST perspective: CGST/IGST computation, ITC eligibility under Central rules, e-invoicing compliance, DRC-01C interpretation, DGGI investigation procedures, cross-state supply classification, and Rule 89 refund computation. |
| Why this matters | Technical Members (Centre) understand the department’s internal processes, audit methodology, and enforcement tools. They can identify when the department has applied rules incorrectly-from the inside. This is invaluable for taxpayers whose appeals involve technical computation disputes (ITC mismatch, refund formula, rate classification). |
4. Technical Member (State)
| Parameter | Detail |
|---|---|
| Appointments status (Apr 2026) | Only a few states (UP, Odisha, Gujarat, Bihar, Maharashtra/Goa) have sent recommendations. Other states’ appointments pending. This is the primary bottleneck in bench operationalisation. |
| Eligibility | Retired officer of State Tax department or equivalent rank (Commissioner of State Tax / Additional Commissioner level), with 25+ years service in state tax administration (VAT/GST). |
| Appointment | By the respective State Government. The Central Government cannot appoint State Technical Members-this is a federalism protection. |
| Term | 4 years or until age 67, whichever is earlier. |
| Role in hearing | Brings State GST perspective: SGST computation, state-specific exemptions and notifications, SGST refund processes, state audit procedures, composition scheme administration, and state-specific e-way bill rules. |
| Why this matters | GST is a dual-tax system. The same transaction attracts both CGST (Central) and SGST (State). Without a State Technical Member, the bench would lack expertise on state-specific GST administration. This is critical for appeals involving SGST demands, state composition scheme disputes, and state refund rejections. |
The Constitutional Journey: Why This Composition Exists
The original proposal (2017-2022): The CGST Act originally proposed each GSTAT bench would have 1 Judicial Member + 1 Technical Member (Centre) + 1 Technical Member (State). This gave technical/administrative members a 2:1 majority over judicial members.
The Madras HC challenge: The composition was challenged before the Madras High Court, which held that a tribunal deciding quasi-judicial matters must have adequate judicial character. A bench where non-judicial members outnumber judicial members was held to be constitutionally problematic, potentially violating the principles established in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) and subsequent Supreme Court jurisprudence on tribunal composition.
The GoM restructuring (2022-2023): The GST Council constituted a Group of Ministers (GoM) in July 2022 to suggest changes. The GoM recommended: (a) State Benches should have 2 Judicial Members + 2 Technical Members (equal representation), (b) the President should be a retired SC Judge or HC Chief Justice (highest judicial qualification), and (c) Judicial Members should be appointed after CJI consultation (ensuring judicial independence). These recommendations were accepted and implemented through amendments to the CGST Act.
Why this matters for taxpayers: The restructured composition ensures that GSTAT orders are legally robust. Orders from a bench with adequate judicial character are less likely to be overturned by High Courts on grounds of procedural impropriety or lack of judicial reasoning. For businesses investing significant resources in GSTAT appeals, this structural protection of judicial quality is fundamental to the credibility of the process.
How the Bench Decides: The Decision-Making Process
Hearing procedure: Both sides (taxpayer and department) present arguments. The bench can request additional documents, ask questions, and direct further inquiry. Written submissions are encouraged under the GSTAT Procedure Rules, 2025. Virtual hearings are supported.
Deliberation: After hearing both sides, the bench deliberates privately. All 4 members (or the quorum of 2-3) participate in the deliberation. The Judicial Members evaluate the legal merits. The Technical Members evaluate the factual and computational aspects. The decision can be unanimous or by majority.
Majority and dissent: If 3 out of 4 members agree, the majority view prevails. If there is a 2:2 split (Judicial Members vs Technical Members), the matter is referred to a Larger Bench or to the President for resolution. In CESTAT practice (the predecessor tribunal), 2:2 splits on significant legal questions were referred to a Larger Bench for authoritative resolution-GSTAT is expected to follow a similar approach.
Order writing: Orders must be passed within 30 days of the final hearing. Orders are digitally signed and uploaded to the GSTAT portal. Each member who agrees with the order signs it. Dissenting members can record their dissent with reasons.
Practical impact: For taxpayers, this means your appeal is evaluated from 4 different perspectives: legal principles (Judicial), Central GST administration (Technical Centre), State GST administration (Technical State), and overall judicial oversight (President, at the Principal Bench). This multi-perspective evaluation produces more balanced and well-reasoned orders than a single-member adjudication.
The Appointment Bottleneck: State Technical Members
The single biggest operational challenge for GSTAT is the appointment of State Technical Members. Here is the situation as of April 2026:
Centre appointments (complete): The Central Government has appointed 31 Technical Members (Centre) for all State Benches + 1 for the Principal Bench. All 52 Judicial Members have been appointed. The President has been in office since May 2024.
State appointments (incomplete): Only a few states-Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, Gujarat, Bihar, and Maharashtra/Goa-have sent their recommendations for State Technical Members. Remaining states are in various stages of selection. Until a state appoints its Technical Member, the bench for that state cannot achieve full composition.
Impact on operations: Benches without State Technical Members can still operate with a reduced quorum (1 Judicial + 1 Technical Centre = 2 members for circuit sittings). But for full bench hearings requiring all 4 members, the State Technical Member’s absence creates a gap. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance has urged the Finance Ministry to adopt a time-bound approach and coordinate with all states.
What this means for your appeal: If your state has not yet appointed a Technical Member, your bench may operate in circuit mode (2-member bench) or your hearing may be delayed. However, filing your appeal now protects your limitation period. When the full bench is constituted, cases filed earlier will be listed first. Do not wait for full bench operationalisation to file-the 30 June 2026 deadline does not wait.
For detailed bench status by state, see our GSTAT State Benches guide (know more). For the pending case backlog and timeline expectations, see our 14,000 pending cases guide (know more).
Powers of GSTAT Members
| Power | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Factual evaluation (Sterling & Wilson, Feb 2026) | GSTAT can independently examine evidence, re-evaluate facts, and reach conclusions different from the First Appellate Authority. Not limited to questions of law. |
| Stay of demand | Can grant stay of the remaining demand (beyond the 20% pre-deposit) pending disposal of the appeal, if the appellant demonstrates financial hardship or prima facie case. |
| Admission of additional evidence | Can admit evidence that was not produced before the First Appellate Authority, if sufficient cause is shown for the non-production. |
| Modification of order | Can confirm, modify, or annul the order appealed against. Can also remand the case to the lower authority for fresh adjudication with specific directions. |
| Rectification of mistakes | Can rectify clerical or arithmetical mistakes in its own orders within 3 months of the order date (or 6 months with reasonable cause). |
| Transfer of cases | The President can transfer cases between State Benches or from State Bench to Principal Bench for consolidated hearing or to prevent conflicting judgments. |
| Anti-profiteering adjudication | Principal Bench has jurisdiction over anti-profiteering matters under S.171, inherited from the erstwhile National Anti-Profiteering Authority. |
| Contempt and compliance | Can ensure compliance with its orders. Non-compliance by the department can be escalated through appropriate legal channels. |
How the Judicial vs Technical Split Affects Different Appeal Types
| Appeal Type | Judicial Member’s Primary Focus | Technical Member’s Primary Focus |
|---|---|---|
| ITC dispute (DRC-01C, S.16/17) | Was Section 16 correctly interpreted? Did the taxpayer receive natural justice? Is the demand time-barred under S.73/74? | Is the ITC computation correct per GSTR-2B/3B? Was Rule 42/43 apportionment done correctly? Are the blocked items per S.17(5) correctly identified? |
| Rate classification | Which HSN/SAC classification is legally correct? How do conflicting notifications apply? What is the correct statutory interpretation? | What is the industry practice? How does the product/service actually function? What did similar classifications resolve as in CESTAT? |
| Place of supply | How do S.10/12/13 apply to this transaction? What is the legal definition of ‘intermediary’? How do SC/HC precedents apply? | What is the actual flow of goods/services? Where does the economic substance lie? How was the transaction invoiced and reported? |
| Refund rejection | Was the rejection procedurally correct? Was the taxpayer given a fair hearing? Is the unjust enrichment finding legally sustainable? | Is the Rule 89(4)/(5) computation correct? Do the FIRC/BRC documents support the claim? Was the GSTR-1 vs shipping bill reconciliation proper? |
| Penalty (S.73/74/122) | Was mens rea established for S.74 (fraud/wilful)? Was proportionality maintained? Are there mitigating circumstances? | Was the penalty calculation arithmetically correct? Was the correct section applied? What was the actual tax shortfall? |
What to Expect When Your Case Is Heard
Based on early GSTAT hearings (February-March 2026) and CESTAT practice:
Hearing format: Semi-formal. Less rigid than High Court. Both sides present arguments orally with reference to written submissions. The bench actively questions both sides. Technical Members often ask detailed questions about the computation, GSTR data, and business operations. Judicial Members focus on legal precedents and procedural compliance.
Document expectations: The bench expects organised, indexed bundles with: (a) appeal memorandum, (b) impugned order, (c) first appeal order, (d) relevant GSTR returns, (e) invoices/documents supporting your position, (f) legal authorities (SC/HC/CESTAT judgments). A paperbook index is mandatory under the Procedure Rules.
Representation: You can appear through a CA, advocate, or authorised representative. For cases above Rs 5 lakh disputed tax, professional representation is strongly recommended. The bench’s questioning is detailed and technical-self-representation risks missing important arguments.
Virtual hearings: Fully supported through the e-Courts Portal. Suitable for routine matters and adjournments. For complex cases with extensive evidence, physical appearance may be more effective. The choice is the appellant’s, subject to the bench’s direction.
Key Takeaways
GSTAT’s composition-2 Judicial Members + 2 Technical Members (1 Centre + 1 State) per State Bench, with a President at the Principal Bench-ensures that every appeal is evaluated from 4 perspectives: legal principles, Central GST expertise, State GST expertise, and overall judicial oversight. This dual judicial-technical structure was adopted after the Madras HC struck down the original composition as constitutionally inadequate.
Judicial Members (52 appointed, CJI-consultation process) bring legal rigour: interpretation of law, application of precedents, and procedural fairness. Technical Members bring practical tax expertise: computation verification, audit methodology understanding, and system-level knowledge of how GSTN, DRC-01C, and e-invoicing actually work.
The appointment of State Technical Members is the primary bottleneck. Only a few states have completed this process. Benches without State members can operate in reduced quorum but cannot conduct full bench hearings. File your appeal regardless-the filing date protects limitation.
The Sterling & Wilson precedent confirms that GSTAT has full factual evaluation power. The bench can re-examine evidence and reach independent conclusions. This means both Judicial and Technical Members actively participate in fact-finding, making GSTAT a genuine second-appeal on facts and law.
Need Help with Your GSTAT Appeal?
Understanding the bench composition helps you tailor your arguments: legal arguments for the Judicial Members, computational and procedural arguments for the Technical Members. Our team prepares appeal memoranda that address both dimensions, ensuring your case resonates with the full bench.
Explore our GSTAT appeal filing (know more) service. For pre-deposit computation, use our GSTAT pre-deposit calculation (know more) tool. For the filing process, see how to file a GSTAT appeal (know more).
For queries, reach out at +91 945 945 6700 or WhatsApp us directly.
