9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod April, 2020 to July 2020, by declaring the same to be illegal and inoperative in law. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding the official Respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner firm, during pendency of the instant writ petition, in the interest of justice. 10.4 Any other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition may also please be granted to the petitioner." 2. Petitioner firm is a proprietorship firm and registered under the Goods and Service Tax w.e.f from 01.07.2017. Respondents departments have assessed the short payment of GST by petitioner amounting to Rs. 16,04,845/- (CGST Rs. 8,02,423/- and SGST Rs. 8,02,423/-). On 28-29.01.2021 the Adjudicating Authority passed an order with regard to difference of tax to the tune of Rs. 33,66,672 and demand was issued under DRC-07. This order dated 28-29.01.2021 was put to challenge in an appeal as provided under Section 107 (1) of Goods and Services Tax Acts, 2017 (In short 'the Act of 2017'), which came to be dismissed vide order dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure P-1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in an appeal, which was dismissed by Appellate Authority vide order dated 10.11.2022. She contended that according to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 was excluded and fresh limitation period was starting from 1st of March, 2022. The appeal is filed after 10 months from the date of starting of limitation. According to provisions under Section 107 of the Act of 2017, the limitation for filing an appeal is only three months and further it can be extended for one month and thereafter, the Appellate Authority was not having any jurisdiction to condone the delay. The Act of 2017 is a special law, it is a entire Code in itself and the provisions of Limitation Act is not applicable. It is contended that the Division Bench of this Court in case of Nandan Steels And Power Limited Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. in W.A. No. 104 of 2021, decided on 10.08.2022 have considered the issue of application of Limitation Act and upheld the order passed by Single Bench dismissing the appeal observing that there is no power to entertain the application for condonation of delay beyond permissible period provided under the Act of 2017. 6. I have hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eme Court will bring the appeal filed by petitioner within limitation. The period of limitation of 90 days, which was extended by Hon'ble Supreme Court starts from 01.03.2022 and will come to an end on 30-31st of May, 2022. Admittedly petitioner has preferred the appeal on 07.10.2022. There is no specific pleading in the writ petition as to how the order dated 28-29.01.2021 could not be challenged within extended period of limitation or further one month thereafter. In the format of appeal it is mentioned that he received copy of order on 07.10.2022. In Clause-16 of the appeal, which required to mention whether appeal is being filed after the prescribed period, it is mentioned as "No" and in Clause 17 with regard to details if there is delay have been left blank. 9. Perusal of copy of order dated 28-29.01.2021 would show that petitioner has submitted an application for certified copy of order on 07.10.2022 and on the same day he received the same. 10. According to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, extending the limitation of three months comes to an end in the month of May, 2022 and further one month on the satisfaction of the Appellate Authority if to be added, as already p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Others, reported in (2008) 3 SCC 70. 13. A reading of Section 29(2) would go to show that the section is divided into two parts, manifested by the expression "and". The first part stipulates that the limitation period prescribed by the special law or local law will prevail over the limitation period prescribed in the Schedule to the Limitation Act. The second part of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act ordains that the Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act will apply for determining the period of limitation "only insofar as, and to the extent which, they are not expressly excluded by such special or local law." (emphasis given) 15. In the case of Hukumdev Narain Yadav v. Lalit Narain Mishra, reported in (1974) 2 SCC 133, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed that in the context of a special law it will be necessary to examine whether the scheme of special law and the nature of the remedy provided therein are such that the Legislature intended it to be a complete code by itself which alone should govern the various matters provided by it and if on an examination of the relevant provisions it is clear that the provisions of the Limitation Act are necessarily excluded, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not filing the same within the period of limitation. In respect of an appeal under Section 107(1) of CGST Act, it is provided that the appeal may be filed within three months from the date on which the decision or order is communicated to such person. Section 107(4) of CGST Act lays down that on sufficient cause being shown, the Appellate Authority may allow the appeal to be presented within a further period of one month. The same would go to show that the legislative intent was not to apply the Limitation Act in the proceedings to be taken under the CGST Act................" 12. The submission of learned counsel for petitioner that as the period of delay has wrongly been assessed by Appellate Authority in the light of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Re-cognizance for extension of limitation (Supra), the matter be remitted back to the First Appellate Authority is also not sustainable as even after excluding the period between 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, filing of an appeal would not come within the extended period of limitation as ordered by Hon'ble Supreme Court and therefore, said exercise would serve no purpose. 13. Further in the decision of High Court of Ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
