Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Appeal dismissed for late filing due to online submission failure under Rule 108 of CGST Rules. Technical glitch acknowledged. The appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to failure to file online as required by Rule 108 of CGST Rules, 2017. The appellants faced a technical issue ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appeal dismissed for late filing due to online submission failure under Rule 108 of CGST Rules. Technical glitch acknowledged.
The appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to failure to file online as required by Rule 108 of CGST Rules, 2017. The appellants faced a technical issue preventing online filing as the order was not uploaded on the website. The State acknowledged the glitch and accepted the hard copy appeal as timely filed. The judgment directed the appellate authority to consider the appeal on its merits, recognizing the technical hindrance and ensuring a fair hearing opportunity for both parties.
Issues: Appeal dismissed as time-barred due to failure to file online as per Rule 108 of CGST Rules, 2017.
Analysis: The judgment involves the impugning of an order where the appellants' refund claim appeal was dismissed as time-barred. The appellants' grievance was that their appeal was rejected for being filed after the stipulated time frame, as per Rule 108 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, which mandates online filing post order upload. However, the appellants were unable to file online as the order had not been uploaded on the website, thus resorting to filing a hard copy after receiving the order in physical form. The State acknowledged a technical website glitch that prevented online filing and accepted the hard copy appeal as filed within the limitation period.
The prayer made was for the appeal to be considered on its merits. The State's counsel admitted the technical issue on the website, leading to the appellants' inability to file online, and agreed that the hard copy appeal should be deemed within the limitation period. Consequently, the judgment directed the appellate authority to hear and decide the appeal against the rejection of the refund application on its merits, ensuring both parties are provided with a fair opportunity to present their case.
In conclusion, the judgment rectified the time-barred dismissal of the appellants' appeal by acknowledging the technical hindrance in online filing due to the order not being uploaded on the website. The State's fair stand led to the disposal of the appeal with directions for a thorough consideration of the appeal on its merits, emphasizing the importance of providing parties with a proper hearing opportunity in such cases.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
