9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (7) TMI 1031 - HC - GSTMaintainability of appeal - appeal rejected on the ground that the same was barred by limitation - HELD THAT - Admittedly, in this case the petitioner had filed an appeal challenging the order passed under Section 73 (9) of the said Act. Simultaneously, with the filing of the appeal, the petitioner had also made pre-deposit of Rs. 63,278/- as is required for maintaining the appeal. As such there is no lack of bona fide on the part of the petitioner in preferring the appeal. It appears that the petitioner had also made a prayer for condonation of delay, inter alia, claiming that by reasons of lack of proper knowledge of the GST portal there had been delay in filing the appeal. There appears to be a delay of 66 days in filing the appeal. Taking into consideration that the petitioner is a small businessman and there is no lack of bona fide on the part of the petitioner and one does not stand to gain by filing a belated appeal, in the instant case, the appellate authority ought to have appropriately considered the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner. The appellate authority, however, appears to have rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation by, inter alia, holding that the delay can only be condoned provided the same is filed within the period of one month of the time prescribed - taking note of the explanation give by the petitioner while setting aside the order dated 30th April 2024, the delay in preferring the appeal is condoned. The appellate authority is directed to hear out and dispose of the appeal, on merit, upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of communication of this order - petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to rejection of appeal on the ground of limitation. Analysis: The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of their appeal by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Central/West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the basis of being time-barred. The petitioner had appealed against an order passed under Section 73 (9) of the said Act for the tax period July 2017 to March 2018. Despite making the necessary pre-deposit required for maintaining the appeal, there was a delay in filing the appeal. The petitioner submitted an application explaining the delay, citing lack of proper knowledge of the GST portal as the reason. The appellate authority rejected the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, stating that the delay could only be condoned if the appeal was filed within one month beyond the prescribed time. The petitioner argued that the rejection was unjustified and sought condonation of the delay. The Court considered the facts, noting that the petitioner had acted in good faith and had made a pre-deposit along with the appeal. The petitioner, being a small businessman, had explained the delay due to lack of knowledge about the GST portal. The Court opined that there was no lack of bona fide on the part of the petitioner in filing the appeal belatedly. The Court also highlighted that one does not stand to gain by filing a delayed appeal. The Court found that the appellate authority had failed to appropriately consider the application for condonation of delay, especially in light of the petitioner's explanation and lack of mala fide intent. The Court referenced a previous judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Court, which contradicted the stance taken by the appellate authority regarding the condonation of delay. The Court held that the appellate authority had not exercised its jurisdiction properly and proceeded to set aside the order rejecting the appeal. Consequently, the Court granted the petitioner's request for condonation of delay and directed the appellate authority to hear and dispose of the appeal on merit within 8 weeks from the date of communication of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and all parties were instructed to act based on the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of the Court.
|
