2024 (6) TMI 364 - HC - GST

Appeal for IGST Refund on Ocean Freight: Court Orders Processing Despite Missing Physical Order Copy.

The petitioner requested acceptance of an appeal concerning a refund of IGST on ocean freight, initially unprocessed due to the absence of a physical copy ... Non-production of physical copy as a technical defect - acceptance and processing of appeal filed within time despite procedural lapse - Rule 108(3) requirement to furnish hard copy of impugned orderNon-production of physical copy as a technical defect - acceptance and processing of appeal filed within time despite procedural lapse - Rule 108(3) requirement to furnish hard copy of impugned order - Whether the appellate authority must process and accept an appeal presented within time where the appellant failed to furnish the hard copy of the impugned order within seven days as required by Rule 108(3). - HELD THAT: - The Court held that the failure to produce the physical copy of the impugned order under Rule 108(3) is a technical defect and does not disentitle an appellant who has presented the appeal within the statutory time limit to have the appeal processed. Relying on this Court's decision in M/s.PKV Agencies and the Orissa High Court decision in M/s.Atlas PVC Pipes Ltd., the Court observed that where the appeal was lodged within time (refund rejection order dated 19.03.2021; appeal lodged on 18.06.2021), the appellate authority should not reject the appeal solely for non-production of the hard copy later furnished (on 02.02.2024). The Court directed the first respondent to process the appeal and, if otherwise in order, to number the appeal within one month from receipt of the order, thereby preserving the appellant's right to adjudication on merits despite the procedural lapse. [Paras 5]The appeal filed on 18.06.2021 must be processed and shall not be rejected solely because the physical copy of the impugned order was filed belatedly; the appellate authority is directed to number the appeal within one month if otherwise in order.Final Conclusion: Writ petitions disposed directing the appellate authority to process the time barred appeal (filed on 18.06.2021) notwithstanding belated production of the physical copy of the impugned order, and to number the appeal within one month if in order; no costs. The petitioner sought direction for acceptance of appeal filed on 18.06.2021 for refund of IGST on ocean freight. The appeal was not processed due to failure to file physical copy of impugned order. Court held non-filing of physical copy as technical defect and directed processing of appeal if filed within time. First respondent ordered to process appeal within one month. W.P.Nos.12497, 12498, 12500 and 12501 of 2024 disposed of with no costs.