Madras High Court condones delay in
filing GST appeal, directs appellate authority to hear case on merits
By Yogesh Verma (CS/LLB) / 2 min read / GST Case Law
Case Title:
NRC.Spin Tex vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Vellakoil, Tiruppur III
Case No.: W.P. No. 29084 of 2024
Date of Order: 1st October 2024
Court: High Court of Judicature at Madras
Judge: Hon'ble Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Facts of the Case:
NRC.Spin Tex, represented by its partner Thirumoorthy
Ramasamy, filed a writ petition challenging an impugned order passed by the
Assistant Commissioner (ST), Vellakoil, Tiruppur III. The case involves the tax
period from July 2017 to March 2018, where an error in the petitioner’s filing
of Form GSTR-3B for December 2017 led to discrepancies. The petitioner claimed
that this mistake was a human error, and they sought an opportunity to rectify
the error.
The petitioner only became aware of the respondent’s
communications (uploaded on the GST portal) much later and thus failed to
respond in time. Consequently, the respondent issued an impugned order on 28th
December 2023 without offering the petitioner a personal hearing. Aggrieved by
this, the petitioner filed an appeal on 20th May 2024, but it was delayed by 54
days. The appellate authority rejected the appeal on 9th July 2024 due to the
delay, claiming it was beyond the statutory period for condoning delays.
Submissions by Petitioner:
1.
Condonation
of Delay:
The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Vignesh Kumar K, submitted that the delay in
filing the appeal occurred because the petitioner was unaware of the uploaded
notices due to a lack of access to the GST portal. The petitioner did not have
an opportunity to present their case and sought the court’s indulgence to
condone the delay and allow the appeal to proceed.
2.
Request
for Reconsideration:
The petitioner argued that the appeal’s rejection based on the 54-day delay was
unjust, given that it resulted from circumstances beyond their control. They
requested the court to set aside the rejection and allow the appeal to be
heard.
Submissions by Respondent:
1.
Failure to
Respond to Notices:
The government advocate for the respondent, Mr. V. Prashanth Kiran, contended
that all necessary communications and notices were properly uploaded on the GST
portal, and it was the petitioner’s responsibility to respond. The petitioner
failed to act within the prescribed timeline, and as a result, the respondent
had followed due procedure in passing the impugned order.
2.
Condonation
of Delay:
Despite this, the respondent did not oppose the petitioner’s request for condonation
of delay, leaving the decision to the court’s discretion.
Court’s Findings and Judgment:
1.
Acknowledgment
of the Petitioner's Situation:
After hearing both sides, Justice Krishnan Ramasamy acknowledged that the petitioner
had not been aware of the uploaded notices due to their limited access to the
GST portal. The court accepted the petitioner’s explanation for the delay as
genuine and found the reasons for non-filing of the appeal within the statutory
period to be justifiable.
2.
Condonation
of Delay:
The court ruled that the petitioner’s delay in filing the appeal should be
condoned. It noted that the reasons provided for the delay were satisfactory
and that justice would be better served by allowing the petitioner to present
their case before the appellate authority.
3.
Quashing
of the Rejection Order:
The court set aside the rejection order dated 9th July 2024, which had
dismissed the petitioner’s appeal on grounds of delay. The court directed the
appellate authority to take the appeal on record and to pass an order based on
its merits.
4.
Directions
for the Appellate Authority:
The court instructed the appellate authority to consider the appeal and render
a decision in accordance with law, ensuring that the petitioner was given a
proper opportunity to be heard.
Conclusion:
The court allowed the writ petition and condoned the 54-day
delay in filing the appeal. The rejection order issued by the appellate
authority was set aside, and the authority was directed to take the
petitioner’s appeal on record and pass appropriate orders after granting
sufficient opportunity for the petitioner to present their 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.
Find the Attachment (Press on Click Here )
Click here
