2022 (8) TMI 1172 - HC - GST

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - it is the specific allegation of the petitioner that no full text of the order along with summary order was furnished to the petitioner at any point of time - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It appears from record that the summary order dated 18th March, 2020 is one line order without containing any detailed supporting reason and that the order of the appellate authority is also one line order dismissing the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of delay in filing the appeal without going into the merit of the appeal, this writ petition is disposed off by setting aside the impugned order of the appellate authority dated 28th July, 2022 and remanding the matter back to the appellate authority concerned to pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law on merit of the said appeal without insisting on the issue of limitation, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the petitioner. Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order of appellate authority based on delay in submission of appeal, lack of detailed reasons in adjudication order, petitioner's claim of being unaware of summary order, impact of Covid-19 on delay, setting aside impugned order and remanding for fresh speaking order.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges the impugned order of the appellate authority dated 28th July, 2022, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to a delay in submission. The adjudication order dated 18th March, 2020, lacked detailed reasons and the petitioner claimed they were not provided with the full text of the order. The petitioner argued they only became aware of the summary order when their bank account was debited on 28th July, 2022. They attributed the delay in filing the appeal to circumstances during the Covid-19 pandemic, seeking protection under a Supreme Court order.

Upon reviewing the submissions and records, the Court noted that both the adjudication order and the appellate authority's order were one-line decisions, with the latter dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without delving into the merits. Consequently, the Court decided to dispose of the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter to the appellate authority for a fresh speaking order on the appeal's merits within eight weeks. The Court emphasized that the new order should not focus on the issue of limitation and should provide the petitioner with an opportunity for a personal hearing.

Additionally, the petitioner was granted liberty to apply for a refund of any excess amount collected beyond the pre-deposit, with the assurance that such applications would be considered by the relevant authority in accordance with the law. The Court stressed the importance of ensuring due process and giving the petitioner a fair chance to present their case during the disposal of the appeal.

← Previous Next →