TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Revives GST Appeal by Examining Petitioner's Good Faith, Mandates Rs. 25,000 Cost and Two-Week Compliance Window</h1> <h3>Acme Paints and Resin Private Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax & Ors.</h3> HC allowed writ petition challenging GST appeal rejection, setting aside appellate authority's order. Despite finding delay explanation insufficient, ... Condonation of delay in filing appeal - proper explanation for delay given or not - oversight on the part of accountant - HELD THAT:- The petitioner claims that by reasons of oversight on the part of its accountant, the appeal could not be filed on time. The aforesaid explanation though, does not appear to be adequate, however, for the end of justice and taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner may have merits in the appeal and the petitioner having deposited the pre-deposit amount, the order dated 15th March, 2024 is set aside, subject to the petitioner’s making payment of cost of Rs. 25,000/- with the concerned GST authorities. Petition disposed off. Issues:Challenge to order under Section 107 of CGST/WBGST Act, 2017 for delay in filing appeal, explanation for belated appeal, consideration of bona fide, setting aside order, payment of cost, condonation of delay, compliance with directions.Analysis:The writ petition was filed to challenge an order dated 15th March, 2024, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017. The petitioner had earlier filed an appeal against an order dated 14th August, 2023, under Section 73 (9) of the said Act, along with a pre-deposit as required under Section 107 (6). However, the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed time, leading to its rejection due to lack of explanation for the delay.The petitioner argued that the delay was due to the accountant's oversight and requested not to reject the appeal on technical grounds, emphasizing the merits of the case. On the other hand, the respondents contended that the appeal was belated with no proper explanation for condonation of delay, supporting the appellate authority's decision to reject the appeal based on limitation grounds.After hearing both parties and examining the facts, the court noted the pre-deposit made by the petitioner, indicating bona fide intentions. Despite finding the explanation for the delay inadequate, the court considered the possibility of merit in the appeal and set aside the order dated 15th March, 2024, subject to the petitioner paying a cost of Rs. 25,000 to the GST authorities.The court directed the petitioner to make the payment within two weeks, along with filing an application for condonation of delay before the appellate authority. Failure to comply would result in the dismissal of the writ petition without further reference to the petitioner. The court emphasized the peremptory nature of the direction and disposed of the writ petition with no order as to costs, providing for the issuance of a certified copy of the order upon compliance with formalities.
TaxTMI 
