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>Judicial Intervention Reinstates Tax Appeal: Delay Condoned, Procedural Fairness Upheld Despite Statutory Silence on Time Limitation</h1> <h3>Tvl. CANPLY, rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Robert Jose Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST) (FAC), The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Coimbatore</h3> Tvl. CANPLY, rep. by its Proprietor Mr. Robert Jose Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST) (FAC), The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Coimbatore - TMI Issues:Challenge to dismissal of appeal due to delay in filing and lack of provision for condonation of delay under Tamil Nadu Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the order dismissing their appeal due to filing beyond the condonable period of limitation and the absence of a provision in the Tamil Nadu Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 to condone the delay. The petitioner contended that the assessment order alleged a mismatch between GSTR - 3B and ITC auto populated in GSTR - 2A, resulting in a tax and penalty amount. The appeal was filed on 02.5.2024 with a petition to condone the delay, but it was dismissed. The petitioner made a 10% payment towards pre-deposit when filing the appeal.The Special Government Pleader argued that the appeal was filed after the limitation period and the additional one-month period for showing cause had expired. The first respondent dismissed the appeal due to the delay in filing. The Court noted the absence of a provision to condone the delay under the Act but acknowledged the petitioner's claim of no opportunity before the assessment order. The Court decided to afford the petitioner an opportunity by setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal to be filed. The first respondent was directed to issue notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass final orders within three months.In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appeal was directed to be taken on file by the first respondent. The first respondent was instructed to issue notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass final orders within three months. No costs were awarded, and the connected WMPs were closed.
TaxTMI 