9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 1044 - HC - GSTMaintainability of appeal - appeal rejected solely on the ground of limitation - non-service of order-in original - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Since the admitted position is that petitioner was not served with the Order-in-Original till 07.03.2023, the limitation for filing the appeal would commence from the date of service i.e. 07.03.2023. Limitation for filing an appeal is 90 days and the Order-in-Appeal shows that the appeal was filed on 22.05.2023. The appeal was accordingly within the period of limitation computed from 07.03.2023. The impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 14.07.2023 is set aside. The appeal is restored to its original number on the records of the Commissioner (Appeals) - Petition disposed off.
Issues involved: Appeal rejected on the ground of limitation.
The judgment addresses the issue of the rejection of the appeal based on limitation. The petitioner challenged the Order-in-Appeal dated 14.07.2023, which upheld the rejection of the appeal filed against the Order-in-Original dated 13.12.2022 solely due to being time-barred. The Order-in-Appeal noted that the original order was passed on 30.12.2022, setting the last date for filing the appeal as 29.03.2023. However, the appeal was actually filed on 22.05.2023, resulting in a delay of nearly two months. Regarding the contention of delay, the Commissioner (Appeals) referred to Section 107 (4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which allows condonation of a one-month delay for sufficient cause. Despite the appellant's argument that they only received the Order-in-Original on 07.03.2023, no documentary evidence was provided. However, upon examination, it was found that the order was initially sent on 30.12.2022 but returned undelivered on 04.01.2023, with no further steps taken by the Department until the petitioner approached them and received the order on 07.03.2023. Given that the petitioner was not served with the Order-in-Original until 07.03.2023, the limitation period for filing the appeal should start from that date. As the appeal was filed on 22.05.2023, within 90 days from the date of service, it was held to be within the permissible time frame. Consequently, the Order-in-Appeal dated 14.07.2023 was set aside, and the appeal was reinstated with the Commissioner (Appeals), who will inform the parties of the next hearing date. In conclusion, the petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner, highlighting the importance of the correct calculation of limitation periods and the necessity of proper service of legal documents to ensure fair judicial processes.
|
