GST Vidhi | GST Case Law

Case Details: M/S A.R. Enterprises Vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax, Appeal Lucknow and 2 Others

Case No.: WRIT TAX No. - 53 of 2024

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 7)

Date of Order: 19.09.2024

Judging Authority: Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J.

Summary of the Case: The petitioner, M/S A.R. Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 08.12.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner, CGST, Lucknow. The appeal was rejected on the grounds that it was filed beyond the limitation period. The petitioner argued that the delay was due to financial hardships and illness of the Managing Partner, and sought relief on the basis of these exceptional circumstances. The court accepted the petitioner's arguments and remanded the case back to the appellate authority for a fresh hearing on the merits without limitation objections.

Facts of the Case:

·        Appeal Filing Date: The petitioner filed an appeal on 16.08.2023.

·        Order Date: The original order was passed on 27.03.2023 by the Superintendent, CGST, Range-I, Division Lucknow-I.

·        Limitation Period: According to Section 107(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, appeals must be filed within three months, with a maximum condonable delay of 30 days.

·        Cause of Delay: The petitioner was unable to file the appeal within the stipulated time due to financial constraints and the illness of the Managing Partner, who was advised bed rest on 20.07.2023.

·        Supporting Evidence: The petitioner submitted a medical certificate from Dr. Sanjay Pandey to support the claim of illness.

Submission by the Petitioner: The petitioner argued that the appeal was delayed due to:

1.     Financial Hardship: The inability to hire legal counsel in time.

2.     Medical Issues: The illness of the Managing Partner, which prevented timely filing of the appeal. The petitioner requested the court to consider these extraordinary circumstances and allow the appeal to be heard on its merits.

Submission by the Respondent:

·        The respondent relied on the CGST Act, which clearly states that an appellate authority cannot condone delays beyond 30 days past the prescribed three-month limitation period. Therefore, the rejection of the appeal was in accordance with the law.

Findings and Judgement of the Court:

·        The court acknowledged the financial and health-related challenges faced by the petitioner.

·        The court reviewed a previous decision in M/s Central Industrial Security Forces, FGUTPP Unit vs. Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax where a delay was excused due to uncontrollable circumstances.

·        The court concluded that although the appellate authority had no legal ground to condone the delay, in the interest of justice, the petitioner deserved a chance to have the appeal heard on its merits.

Conclusion: The court set aside the impugned order dated 08.12.2023, remanding the matter back to the appellate authority. It directed the authority to consider the appeal on its merits without raising any objections related to the limitation period. The court emphasized the importance of providing the petitioner a fair hearing, taking into account the special circumstances of the case.

Disclaimer: All the Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by the Govt. authority and judgement delivered by the court or the authority information is strictly for educational purposes and on the basis of our best understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.