Procedural defect in GST appeal filing cannot defeat a timely appeal when the physical order copy is filed late.

A timely filed GST appeal cannot be defeated by delayed production of the physical copy of the impugned order where the defect is only technical and procedural. Rule 108(3)'s hard-copy requirement within seven days was treated as a filing formality, so belated furnishing of the order did not justify rejection of an otherwise in-time appeal. The appeal was to be processed and numbered, and the matter was directed to be considered on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal could be processed and numbered despite the belated filing of the physical copy of the impugned order, when the appeal itself was presented within the prescribed limitation period.

Analysis: The appeal against the refund rejection order was filed within time. The requirement under Rule 108(3) regarding filing of a hard copy within seven days was treated as a procedural formality, and the delay in producing the physical copy was regarded as a technical defect that did not defeat an otherwise time-barred-free appeal. The earlier view that such non-production should not prevent processing of a timely appeal was applied.

Conclusion: The appeal is to be processed and not rejected merely because the physical copy of the impugned order was filed belatedly; if otherwise in order, it is to be numbered.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were allowed to the extent of securing consideration of the appeal on merits, with a direction to treat the appeal as filed in time for processing purposes.

Ratio Decidendi: A timely filed appeal under the GST regime cannot be defeated by non-compliance with the requirement to furnish the physical copy of the impugned order within the prescribed period, where the defect is only technical and procedural.

---