2024 (6) TMI 666 - HC - GST

Rejection of the appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - appeal was filed beyond the time prescribed - HELD THAT - The appeal had been dismissed solely on the ground that the same had been filed beyond one month of the time prescribed for filing the appeal. The appeal therefor, was obviously barred by limitation. However, at the same time, the aforesaid could not prevent the petitioner from maintaining an application for condonation of delay by invoking the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The issue whether the Appellate Authority is competent to condone the delay beyond one month from the prescribed period for filing of an appeal has already been conclusively decided by the Hon ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of S. K. Chakraborty Sons Vs. Union of India 2023 (12) TMI 290 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT . No fruitful purpose will be served by remanding the aforesaid matter on the issue of condonation of delay to the Appellate Authority and also considering the explanation given by the petitioner, the petitioner has been able to sufficiently explain the delay in filing the appeal belatedly. The aforesaid appeal restored to its original file and number and direct the Appellate Authority to hear out the same in accordance with law on merit within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging rejection of appeal under Section 107 of West Bengal Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 based on delay in filing.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition questioning the rejection of the appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed time and accompanied by an application for condonation of delay due to a 55-day delay. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal solely based on being filed beyond one month of the prescribed period, citing lack of power to condone the delay. The petitioner argued for the right to prefer an appeal and seek condonation of delay. The respondents opposed, stating no irregularity in refusing to condone delay beyond the specified period.

The Court considered the matter and noted that while the appeal was time-barred, the petitioner could still seek condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Referring to a previous judgment, the Court held that the Appellate Authority should have considered the explanation for delay provided in the application. The Court set aside the rejection of the appeal, finding the petitioner sufficiently explained the delay. The appeal was restored, directing the Appellate Authority to hear it on merit within two months.

The Court disposed of the writ petition, stating that since no affidavit-in-opposition was filed, the allegations in the petition were not deemed admitted by the respondents. The Court directed the provision of a certified copy of the order to the parties upon compliance with formalities.