Procedural defect in GST appeal filing cannot defeat timely appeals where the physical copy is filed later.

Non-filing of the physical copy of the impugned order within the period prescribed under Rule 108(3) of the GST Rules was treated as a procedural defect, not a substantive bar to maintainability. Because the appeals had been filed within limitation, the later filing of the hard copy could not justify refusal to process them. The authority was directed to number and process the appeals if they were otherwise in order.

---

---

Issues: Whether non-filing of the physical copy of the impugned order within the period prescribed under Rule 108(3) of the GST Rules could justify refusal to process appeals that were otherwise filed within limitation.

Analysis: The appeals were lodged within the statutory time limit, while the hard copy of the impugned orders was filed later. The requirement of producing the hard copy was treated as a procedural and technical formality rather than a substantive condition affecting the maintainability of the appeals. Since the appeal filing was within time, the omission to file the physical copy promptly could not be used to reject processing of the appeals.

Conclusion: The delay in filing the hard copy did not bar processing of the appeals, and the authority was directed to number and process them if they were otherwise in order.

---