2024 (6) TMI 278 - AAAR - GST

AAAR condones 27-day delay in GST appeal filing due to representative's illness under Section 100(2)

In Re: M/s. Faiveley Transport Rail Technologies India Private Limited,

The AAAR Tamil Nadu condoned a 27-day delay in filing an appeal regarding GST levy on car facilities provided to employees. The appeal was filed on ... Condonation of delay in filing appeal - Levy of GST - facility of car extended to the employees of the Applicant-Company in the course of employment. Condonation of delay in filing appeal - HELD THAT:- It is seen that the appeal was filed on 12.04.2024, after a delay of 27 days. As per Section 100 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017, 30 days is the time limit for filing the appeal from the date of receipt of the order - The appellant having filed the application for appeal on 12.04.2024, it is noticed that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 27 days, but in any case, the appeal has been filed within the condonable time limit of 30 days. Shri Ganesh Kumar (AR), who has been entrusted with the responsibility of preparing and filing the appeal, was not keeping well during the relevant period of time, i.e., from 05.03.2024 to 15.03.2024. Further, considering the state of affairs at the relevant point of time, the appellant has also sought extension of time for filing the appeal under their letter dated 14.03.2024. This being the case, we feel that the appellant has presented sufficient cause that prevented them from filing the appeal within the normal period. Therefore, the delay of 27 days beyond the normal time limit in filing the appeal is condonable as provided under the proviso to Section 100 (2) of CGST Act, 2017. The delay in filing the appeal by the appellant beyond the normal time limit of 30 days is condoned in terms of proviso to Section 100 (2) of CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017, and the appeal will be taken up for consideration on merits. Issues involved: The appeal was filed against the Order No. 125/AAR/2023 dated 20.12.2023 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) on the Application for Advance Ruling filed by the Appellant. The main issue in this case was whether GST is applicable on the facility of car extended to the employees of the Applicant-Company in the course of employment.Condonation of Delay:The Appellant filed a petition for condonation of delay as the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed time limit of 30 days from the passing of the AAR's order. The authorized representative (AR) of the company, Shri Ganesh Kumar, explained that due to health issues, he was unable to file the appeal in time. He provided a medical certificate and a letter seeking an extension of time for filing the appeal. The Appellate Authority considered the reasons presented and decided to condone the delay of 27 days, falling within the condonable time limit of 30 days as specified in the proviso to Section 100 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017.Decision on Delay Condonation:The Appellate Authority found that the appellant had presented sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The medical certificate and the letter seeking an extension of time supported the claim that the authorized representative was unwell during the relevant period. Therefore, the delay of 27 days was deemed condonable under the proviso to Section 100 (2) of the CGST Act, 2017. The authority passed an order to condone the delay in filing the appeal, allowing it to be taken up for consideration on merits.Legal Provisions:The judgment highlighted various legal provisions under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Tamil Nadu Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. Sections such as 102, 103, and 104 were referenced, outlining the authority's powers to rectify errors, the binding nature of advance rulings, and the consequences of obtaining rulings through fraud or misrepresentation. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to the specified time limits for filing appeals and the authority's discretion in condoning delays under certain circumstances.Conclusion:The Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Tamil Nadu, considered the appeal filed by the Appellant regarding the applicability of GST on the facility of car extended to employees. After reviewing the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal, the authority decided to condone the delay of 27 days and proceed with the consideration of the appeal on its merits. This decision was based on the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and the circumstances presented by the authorized representative of the company.