9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 828 - HC - GSTRejection of petitioner s application for refund - appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the ground of delay - HELD THAT - The issue regarding condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority is no more res integra in view of the latest judgment of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in S.K. CHAKRABORTY SONS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ORS. 2023 (12) TMI 290 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT and ARVIND GUPTA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE STATE TAXES, COOCH BEHAR CHARGE ORS. 2024 (1) TMI 1096 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT - It has been categorically held that the appellate authority under the GST Act has power under law to condone the delay beyond 120 days. Hence, in view of the settled position of law, the appellate authority ought to have condoned the delay in the statutory period while considering the petitioner s appeal. Further, as held by this Court in RAKESH MANDA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CGST CENTRAL EXCISE, COOCH BEHAR DIVISION ORS. 2022 (7) TMI 1398 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT , the appellate authority has the power under Rule 107 of the CGST Act to accept additional documents under certain circumstances. This Court condones the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the order dated 24.09.2021 passed by the appellate authority. The matter is remanded back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration - Petition disposed off by way of remand.
Issues:
1. Rejection of refund claim by respondent no. 2 2. Dismissal of appeal on the ground of delay 3. Compliance with principles of natural justice 4. Condonation of delay in filing appeal 5. Power of appellate authority to accept additional documents Analysis: 1. The petitioner challenged the rejection of the refund claim by respondent no. 2, which was based on the ground of non-submission of documents. The petitioner contended that he was not informed of the rejection and never received a show cause notice, alleging a violation of principles of natural justice. 2. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the appellate authority citing a delay of 7 months, exceeding the statutory period of three months for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The respondent argued that the delay was unjustified and not condonable beyond the permissible one-month extension. 3. The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to lack of knowledge about the rejection order until 12.08.2020. The court considered the latest judgments of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, establishing that the appellate authority has the power to condone delays beyond 120 days. 4. The court held that the appellate authority should have condoned the delay in filing the appeal, as per the settled position of law. Referring to a previous judgment, the court emphasized the authority's discretion to accept additional documents under Rule 107 of the CGST Act in certain circumstances. 5. Consequently, the court set aside the order of dismissal dated 24.09.2021 and remanded the matter back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The appellate authority was directed to allow the petitioner to submit additional documents, which would be evaluated in accordance with Rule 107 of the CGST Act. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
|
