2021 (6) TMI 636 - HC - GST

Maintainability of appeal - time limitation - appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the appeal was not presented within the time prescribed under law - appeal was accompanied by the downloaded printed copy of the order appealed and was not accompanied by the certified copy thereof at that stage since the Lawyer who had filed the appeal was in self quarantine - Sufficient cause for delay present or not - HELD THAT - Considering that the explanation offered by the petitioner is a plausible and not an unreasonable one, especially in these Covid times, and further considering that a downloaded copy thereof was in fact submitted along with the appeal which was otherwise filed within time, this Court is of the view that the mere delay in enclosing a certified copy of order appealed against along with the appeal should not come in the way of the Petitioner s appeal for being considered on merits by the Appellate Authority. This is a case of substantial compliance and the interests of justice ought not to be constrained by a hyper technical view of the requirement that a certified copy of the order appealed against should be submitted within one week of the filing of the appeal. The impugned order dated 10th March, 2021 of the Appellate Authority rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay, is hereby set aside - appeal is now restored to the file of the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Balasore and is directed to be listed there for directions on 5th July, 2021 at 11 am.

Summary

Issues:
Determining whether the Appellate Authority was justified in dismissing the appeal due to delay in filing the certified copy of the order appealed against within the prescribed time under the OGST Rules, 2017.

Analysis:
The key issue in this judgment revolves around the dismissal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority under the OGST Act, 2017, based on the delay in submitting the certified copy of the order appealed against. The Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal as it was not accompanied by the certified copy within the stipulated time frame, despite the appeal itself being filed within the prescribed period. The crux of the matter lies in whether the delay in furnishing the certified copy should be a ground for rejecting the appeal.

The legal framework under Section 107(1) and Section 107(4) of the OGST Act, 2017, is crucial in analyzing this issue. Section 107(1) allows for an appeal within three months from the date of the decision or order, while Section 107(4) empowers the Appellate Authority to condone delays if satisfied with sufficient cause. In this case, the Petitioner filed the appeal within the stipulated three months but failed to provide the certified copy within seven days, leading to the dismissal.

The Court delves into the interpretation of Section 107(4) to determine whether the delay in submitting the certified copy can be condoned. The Petitioner's counsel argued that the delay was due to the lawyer's quarantine after coming into contact with a COVID-19 positive client, highlighting the practical challenges faced by legal practitioners during the pandemic. The Court acknowledged the reasonable explanation for the delay and emphasized the need for a liberal approach, especially in the current circumstances.

The judgment emphasizes the principle of substantial compliance and the importance of not being overly technical in procedural matters, especially during the pandemic when court functions are restricted. The Court opined that the interests of justice should prevail over technicalities, and a more lenient view should be adopted in condoning delays, considering the prevailing situation. Consequently, the Court set aside the Appellate Authority's order and directed the appeal to be reconsidered on its merits.

Furthermore, the Court issued guidelines for future cases, suggesting a more flexible approach in accepting appeals accompanied by downloaded copies of orders, subject to verification by the advocate. The judgment underscores the need for adaptability and understanding in legal proceedings during the pandemic, urging authorities to consider the practical challenges faced by litigants and legal professionals.

In conclusion, the judgment provides a nuanced analysis of the procedural requirements under the OGST Act, 2017, in light of the exceptional circumstances posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. It underscores the importance of balancing procedural adherence with the overarching goal of ensuring access to justice and fairness in legal proceedings.