2025 (2) TMI 665 - HC - GST

Invocation of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution - petitioner argued that the appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit despite receiving the order after the date mentioned on it - HELD THAT - The Additional Commissioner has clearly taken an extremely narrow and pedantic view since the condonable period of an additional 30 days was one which was clearly applicable and could have been invoked for the purposes of entertaining the appeal and trying the challenge on merits. The Order-in-Appeal of the Additional Commissioner dated 29 December 2023 is quashed - petition allowed.

Summary

The Delhi High Court, in a case involving the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, considered a writ petition challenging an order by the Additional Commissioner. The petitioner argued that the appeal was filed within the prescribed time limit despite receiving the order after the date mentioned on it. The Additional Commissioner held that the order was deemed served on the date it was uploaded electronically and dismissed the appeal due to lack of a formal condonation application for the delayed filing.The Court criticized the narrow approach of the Additional Commissioner, noting that the additional 30-day condonable period should have been considered for filing the appeal. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Additional Commissioner's order, and deemed the appeal as filed within the statutory time limit. The appeal was revived for a fresh hearing on its merits before the appellate authority, with all rights and contentions of the parties preserved.