9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 731X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this Court, the appellate authority in rejecting the application for condonation of delay and as a consequence rejecting the appeal vide impugned order dated 30/05/2024 on the ground of delay, does not seem to be proper, legal and justified. The appellate authority ought to have given a fair consideration to the contentions of the petitioner and ought to have got it verified whether the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Justice Gajendra Singh For the Petitioner : Shri Ashish Goyal - learned counsel For the Respondent No.2 : Ms. Mital Ukani- learned counsel ORDER PER: JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 107 of Central GST ACt, 2017and M.P. GST Act, 2017 has been filed assailing order dated 30/05/2024 passed by respondent N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me limit for filing the appeal is within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person, therefore, the appeal filed by the petition is within limitation period. Hence, respondent No.1 has committed grievous error in rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground of limitation. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e rejecting the appeal vide impugned order dated 30/05/2024 on the ground of delay, does not seem to be proper, legal and justified. 6. The appellate authority ought to have given a fair consideration to the contentions of the petitioner and ought to have got it verified whether the order was duly served either physically or electronically to the petitioner and only then should have taken a decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
