Effective notice in GST appeals can justify writ condonation of delay and preserve the right to have the matter heard on merits.

Where statutory service through portal or e-mail does not give effective knowledge of an assessment order, writ jurisdiction may be invoked to preserve the right of appeal despite the limited condonation scheme under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The High Court noted that the order was not reflected on the assigned case dashboard and was not disclosed on portal access, so the petitioner could not be treated as having meaningful notice. It also treated the earlier filing of an appeal for one year as inconsistent with deliberate inaction for later years. Delay was therefore condoned and the appeal was restored for decision on merits by a speaking order after hearing both sides.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the statutory appeal against the assessment orders could be condoned under writ jurisdiction when the orders were not effectively accessible to the petitioner, and whether the petitioner should be permitted to pursue the appeal on merits.

Analysis: The limitation scheme under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 permits only limited condonation at the appellate stage, but the constitutional power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India remains available in appropriate cases. The Court found that service through the portal and e-mail, on the facts, did not establish effective knowledge of the detailed order because the order was not reflected on the assigned case dashboard and the petitioner's portal access did not disclose the decision. The Court also took note that an appeal had already been pursued for an earlier year, which made the non-filing of appeals for the subsequent years inconsistent with any deliberate inaction.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the petitioner was permitted to file the appeal within the stipulated time, with the appellate authority directed to decide it on merits by a speaking order after hearing both sides.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained restoration of the appellate remedy, and the dispute was left to be adjudicated by the appellate authority on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: In an appropriate case, the High Court may exercise writ jurisdiction to condone delay and preserve the right of appeal where statutory service does not result in effective knowledge of the order and denial of relief would leave the party without a meaningful remedy.

---