2023 (6) TMI 941 - HC - GST

Appeals under Section 107(4) CGST Act must be filed within 30 days; no extension allowed beyond this period

Penuel Nexus Pvt. Ltd., Rep. By ITS Managing Director Sri. M.O. Joseph Versus The Additional Commissioner Headquarters (Appeals), State Tax Officer, Taxpayer Services Circle, Cochin

The HC held that appeals under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 must be filed within the prescribed 30-day period, with no power to condone delay ... Maintainability of petition - time limitation - Can an appeal be filed beyond the time period prescribed u/s 107 (4) of the CGST Act, 2017? - HELD THAT:- Interpreting an analogous provision under the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Honourable Supreme Court in SINGH ENTERPRISES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR [2007 (12) TMI 11 - SUPREME COURT] held there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The Commissioner and the High Court were therefore justified in holding that there was no power to condone the delay after the expiry of 30 days' period. The Central Goods and Services Tax Act is a special statute and a self-contained code by itself. Section 107 has an inbuilt mechanism and has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act. It is trite, that the Limitation Act will apply only if it is extended to the special statute. It is also rudimentary that the provisions of a fiscal statute have to be strictly construed and interpreted - On an appreciation of the language of Section 107(4) and the above analysed factual and legal background, this Court is of the view that there is no illegality in the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting the appeal as time-barred. Petition dismissed. Issues:- Can an appeal be filed beyond the time period prescribed under Section 107 (4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2007Rs.Judgment:Issue 1: Appeal filed beyond prescribed time periodThe petitioner, a firm engaged in direct marketing, had its GST registration cancelled due to delayed filing of returns caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The appeal against the cancellation was rejected by the 1st respondent citing delay. The petitioner argued that the rejection was erroneous, citing a similar case from the High Court of Uttarakhand. The Government Pleader contended that the appeal was time-barred as per Section 107(4) of the Act, which allows a limited time frame for filing appeals. The appeal in this case was filed after 209 days, clearly exceeding the statutory period.Issue 2: Interpretation of statutory provisionsSection 107(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides a provision for condonation of delay if the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the prescribed period, allowing a further period of one month. The Supreme Court's interpretation of similar provisions under the Central Excise Act, 1944, emphasizes the strict adherence to the prescribed time limits for filing appeals, excluding the application of the Limitation Act. The Central Goods and Services Tax Act is considered a special statute with its own self-contained code, requiring a strict interpretation of its provisions.Conclusion:Considering the specific language of Section 107(4) and the legal background, the Court found no illegality in the 1st respondent's decision to reject the appeal as time-barred. The writ petition was deemed meritless and subsequently dismissed.