9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1096X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the prayer of the petitioner for condonation of delay. The impugned order passed by the appellate authority that there is no scope to condone the delay beyond four months suffers from infirmity. This court has to consider whether the petitioner has made out sufficient cause for presenting the appeal beyond the statutory period of limitation - After going through the reasons for the delay as evident from the annexure to FORM GST APL-01, this court is of the considered view that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the statutory period. This court, therefore, holds that the appellate authority failed to exercise its jurisdiction in the case on hand - the delay in presenting the appeal befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port of the medical treatment of the petitioner was also enclosed. 7. Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the grounds for rejection of the appeal on the ground that the appellate authority lacks power to condone the delay cannot be sustained in view of the judgment and order dated December 01, 2023 passed by the Hon ble Division Bench in MAT 81 of 2022 heard analogously with MAT 82 of 2022 in the case of S.K. Chakraborty Sons v. Union of India Ors. 8. Heard Mr. Agarwal, learned advocate appearing for the State and Mr. Banik, learned advocate representing the respondent nos. 5 and 7 on such submission. 9. The Hon ble Division Bench in S.K. Chakraborty Sons (supra) held thus: 16. The Co-ordinate Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l or local law, the provisions contained in Sections 4 to 24 both inclusive shall apply only insofar as and to the extent to which they are not expressly excluded by the special or the local law. 19. Section 107 of the Act of 2017 does not exclude the applicability of the Act of 1963 expressly. It does not exclude the applicability of the Act of 1963 impliedly also if one has to consider the provisions of Section 108 of the Act of 2017 which provides for a power of revision to the designated authority, against an order of adjudication. In case of revision a far more enlarged period of time for the Revisional Authority to intervene has been prescribed. Two periods of limitations have been prescribed for two different authorities namely, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 5 of the Act of 1963 have not been expressly or impliedly excluded by Section 107 of the Act of 2017 by virtue of Section 29(2) of the Act of 1963, Section 5 of the Act of 1963 stands attracted. It follows therefrom that the appellate authority is left with the discretion to allow an appeal to be presented within a period of one month after expiry of the period of limitation stipulated from the date of communication of the order upon sufficient cause being shown. Since the applicability of the 1963 Act has not been expressly or impliedly excluded, the appellate authority has the power to condone delay in preferring the appeal beyond the limitation specified in Section 107 of the said Act in view of the decision in S.K. Chakraborty (s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
