2024 (7) TMI 248 - HC - GST

Rejection of appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 107 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - petitioner contends that the petitioner did not get opportunity to respond to SCN since, the same was not available for viewing on the view notices tab - HELD THAT - A detailed explanation as to why the appeal had been filed out of time had been provided. The aforesaid aspect, unfortunately, had not been appropriately considered by the appellate authority who had proceeded to mechanically observe, inasmuch as, the petitioner had filed the appeal after a gap of six months and twelve days, there was no reasonable cause for the delay. The fact that the petitioner was prevented from filing the appeal within the time prescribed had not been considered. Lack of knowledge, as regards passing of the aforesaid order, had not been considered by the appellate authority. The order impugned thus, appears to be perverse. It has already been held by the Hon ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of S.K. CHAKRABORTY SONS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ORS. 2023 (12) TMI 290 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT that the appellate authority is competent to hear an appeal by condoning the delay beyond one month from the prescribed period as provided in Section 107 (4) of the said Act. Having regard to the aforesaid, the order dated 27th February, 2024, passed by the appellate authority, cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. Thus, no useful purpose will be served by remanding the matter to the appellate authority to reconsider the application for condonation of delay - Since, the explanation provided by the petitioner appears to be sufficient, by condoning the delay, the appellate authority is directed to hear out and dispose of the appeal on merit after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. The petition is disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to rejection of appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 based on delay in filing, lack of knowledge regarding show cause notice and order, violation of principles of natural justice, rejection of application for condonation of delay, competence of appellate authority to condone delay.

Analysis:

1. Challenge to Rejection of Appeal: The petitioner challenged the rejection of the appeal under Section 107 of the said Act, citing a delay of 73 days in filing the appeal due to lack of knowledge regarding the show cause notice and order. The petitioner contended that the appellate authority did not consider the reasons for the delay provided in the appeal application, leading to a mechanical rejection.

2. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice and order were not available for viewing in the appropriate section of the portal, preventing a timely response. Citing a judgment from the Delhi High Court, the petitioner claimed that such lack of knowledge constitutes a violation of principles of natural justice, as seen in a similar case.

3. Rejection of Application for Condonation of Delay: The appellate authority rejected the petitioner's application for condonation of delay without considering the reasons for the delay adequately. The petitioner's counsel highlighted that lack of knowledge regarding the order and the petitioner's ill health during the relevant period were valid reasons for the delay.

4. Competence of Appellate Authority: The High Court noted that the appellate authority is competent to hear an appeal by condoning the delay beyond one month from the prescribed period under Section 107 (4) of the said Act. The Court found that the appellate authority had not appropriately considered the petitioner's reasons for the delay, leading to the rejection of the appeal.

5. Judgment and Directions: The High Court set aside the order of the appellate authority dated 27th February, 2024, and directed the appellate authority to hear and dispose of the appeal on merit after condoning the delay. The Court emphasized giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order, ensuring the principles of natural justice are upheld.

6. Disposition: The writ petition was disposed of with the above observations and directions. The Court deemed the allegations in the writ petition not admitted by the respondents due to the absence of an affidavit-in-opposition. The High Court directed the provision of a certified copy of the order to the parties upon compliance with formalities if applied for, concluding the judgment.