Limitation should not defeat a marginally delayed GST appeal where a substantive statutory challenge remains open for merits review.

A marginal delay beyond the condonable period was not treated as an absolute bar where a substantive GST challenge remained to be examined, including the contention that the tax proposal had been confirmed under Section 74 despite the alleged absence of its ingredients. The HC set aside the appellate order rejecting the appeal as time-barred and directed the appellate authority to receive and decide the appeal on merits without examining limitation, thereby restoring access to the statutory appellate remedy while leaving the tax dispute open.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate order rejecting the appeal as time-barred beyond the condonable period was liable to be set aside and whether the appeal should be directed to be received and decided on merits.

Analysis: The delay beyond the condonable period was only 21 days. The petitioner also raised a substantive challenge that the tax proposal had been confirmed under Section 74 of the applicable GST enactments although the ingredients of that provision were stated to be unsatisfied. In these circumstances, the limitation objection was not treated as a bar to consideration of the appeal on merits.

Conclusion: The appellate order rejecting the appeal was set aside and the appellate authority was directed to receive and dispose of the appeal on merits without examining limitation.

Final Conclusion: Limited relief was granted by restoring access to the appellate remedy, while leaving the merits of the tax dispute open for decision by the appellate authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the delay beyond the condonable period is marginal and a substantive statutory challenge remains to be adjudicated, the appellate authority may be directed to entertain the appeal on merits notwithstanding the limitation objection.

---