9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 894 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURTRejection of petitioner s appeal - rejection on the ground of time limitation and lack of sufficient cause for filing the appeal - HELD THAT - Admittedly, in this case the order passed under Section 73 (9) of the said Act had been received by the petitioner on 9th November 2023. It is true that there is no appropriate explanation provided by the petitioner for the period between 9th November 2023 and February 2024. However, there appears to be some explanation given by the petitioner for the period from February 2024 till 18th March 2024 when the appeal was filed. The appellate authority has acknowledged the factum of the petitioner s proprietor s illness. The justice will be sub-served if the appeal is directed to be heard out on merits subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the State Revenue Authorities - petition disposed off Issues Involved:
The present writ petition challenges the order rejecting the petitioner's appeal u/s 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017 on the grounds of delay and insufficient cause for filing the appeal beyond the statutory period. Details of Judgment: 1. The petitioner received a show cause notice u/s 73 of the said Act on discrepancies for the financial year 2017-18, leading to an order dated 9th November 2023. The petitioner filed an appeal u/s 107 with a pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed tax, which was beyond the limitation period. 2. The petitioner cited the proprietor's illness as the reason for the delay, supported by a medical certificate, explaining the 38-day delay in filing the appeal. 3. Despite acknowledging the proprietor's illness and the medical certificate, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal, stating no explanation was provided for the period before February 2024. 4. The petitioner argued that sufficient reasons were given for the delay, seeking to set aside the order and remand the matter for a hearing on merits. 5. The respondent contended that the petitioner failed to explain the delay before February 2024, justifying the appellate authority's decision to reject the appeal. 6. The court noted the lack of explanation for the period between November 9, 2023, and February 2024 but considered the reasons given for the subsequent period till the filing of the appeal on March 18, 2024. 7. The court directed the appeal to be heard on merits upon payment of costs to the State Revenue Authorities, setting aside the order dated March 28, 2024. 8. The writ petition was disposed of with the mentioned directions, instructing all parties to act based on the server copy of the order downloaded from the Court's official website.
|
