9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 610 - HC - GSTCondonation of delay in filing appeal - Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Undisputedly, the appeal was filed with a delay of 14 months and 3 days. The delay was sought to be explained on account of illness of the petitioner. Perusal of Section 107(2) read with Section 107(4) of the Act reveals that against the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax Mobile Squad, Etah dated 29.12.2018, the appeal could have been filed within three months from the date of communication. The delay, if any, in filing such appeal could be condoned under Section 107(4) of the Act which provides that the delay not exceeding one month beyond the period of three months may be condoned by the assessing authority on being satisfied. In the instant case, against the order dated 29.12.2018, the petitioner had filed the appeal on 02.03.2020. Thus, the appeal was filed well beyond the period of 14 months and 3 days. The admitted delay of 14 months and 3 days could not have been condoned. Consequently, the appellate authority has committed no error in rejecting the appeal as time barred - Petition dismissed.
Issues:
1. Appeal filed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 dismissed as time-barred due to delay of 14 months and 3 days. 2. Interpretation of Section 107(2) and Section 107(4) of the Act regarding the limitation to file an appeal. 3. Applicability of the principle of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in the context of the specific provisions of the GST Act. Analysis: 1. The judgment addresses the dismissal of the appeal filed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, due to a delay of 14 months and 3 days. The Additional Commissioner, Grade-II (Appeal), Commercial Tax, Aligarh, dismissed the appeal as time-barred based on the provisions of the Act. 2. The court examined Section 107(2) read with Section 107(4) of the Act to determine the timeline for filing the appeal. It was noted that the appeal should have been filed within three months from the date of communication of the order. The Act allows for the condonation of delay not exceeding one month beyond the three-month period. In this case, the appeal was filed well beyond the permissible time frame, leading to its dismissal. 3. The judgment emphasizes that Section 107(2) read with Section 107(4) of the Act constitutes a comprehensive code regarding the limitation for filing appeals. It clarifies that the principle of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which deals with the extension of time limits, does not apply in situations governed by specific provisions like those in the GST Act. 4. Consequently, the court concluded that the delay of 14 months and 3 days could not be condoned, affirming the decision of the appellate authority to reject the appeal as time-barred. The writ petition challenging this decision was found to be without merit and was dismissed, with the petitioner advised to explore other available remedies. This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the issues involved and the court's reasoning behind its decision.
|
