9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 273 - HC - GSTCondonation of delay in filing appeal before the Appellate Authority - petition preferred under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017 has been dismissed on the ground of barred by limitation - Detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit - HELD THAT - The Appellate Authority has been given the power to condone the delay of only one month i.e. 30 days and not beyond that. Thus, from the plain reading of the provisions it clearly establishes the fact that the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act would not be governing the field in view of the specific period of limitation and the period for condonation of delay being provided. The original order was dated 15.10.2018. The appeal had to be filed within three months i.e. by 15.01.2019. If for some reason the appeal would not be filed under any circumstances, it ought to have been filed within a further period of 30 days. Having not done so within the said stipulated 30 days period, any subsequent filing of the appeal beyond the extended 30 days period the Appellate Authority would not have the power to condone the delay. The fact that there is an upper limit of only one month provided in the statutes itself for preferring an appeal beyond the prescribed period of three months itself establishes the fact that beyond that extended period of one month after the expiry of period of limitation, the Appellate Authority becomes functus officio and would not be in a position to entertain the appeal nor does he have the power to condone the delay. This Court does not find a strong case made out by the counsel for the petitioner in the instant case calling for an interference to the order passed by the Respondent - Petition dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to order dismissing appeal on grounds of limitation under Section 107 of GST Act, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the order dated 09.01.2020 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) dismissing the appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017 as barred by limitation. The original order imposing a penalty was dated 15.10.2018, and the appeal was filed on 21.05.2019. The Appellate Authority can only condone a delay of one month beyond the prescribed period of three months. The provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act do not apply due to the specific limitation period provided. Once the appeal period and the additional 30-day period have lapsed, the Appellate Authority becomes functus officio and cannot entertain the appeal or condone the delay. The Supreme Court's judgment in the case of M/s N.V. International vs. State of Assam and others clarified that authorities cannot condone delays beyond the statutory period provided under the statutes. The Court emphasized that allowing condonation beyond the prescribed period would defeat the statutory purpose. A similar stance was taken in the case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada & Ors. vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited. The Court reiterated that Appellate Authorities cannot condone delays beyond the stipulated period, even in extraordinary circumstances seeking condonation. The High Court, citing the Supreme Court's decisions, held that it cannot interfere with the order passed by the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal due to limitation. The Court found no strong case for interference and rejected the writ petition accordingly. The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to statutory limitation periods and the limitations on the power of Appellate Authorities to condone delays beyond the specified timeframe.
|
