HC rejects four-year delayed GST appeals under Section 107, finds no extraordinary circumstances to condone delay

The Kerala HC dismissed a writ petition seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals under CGST/SGST Acts. The petitioner filed appeals in February 2024, four years after the February 2020 orders. The HC held it cannot normally extend statutory time limits under Art. 226 for appeals under Section 107 of CGST/SGST Acts, citing SC precedents. No extraordinary circumstances were found to justify the delay. The petition was also dismissed for inordinate delay in approaching the court, with the petitioner's medical excuse deemed insufficient. The four-year delay was considered unreasonable and the relief was declined.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner seeks relief for delay in filing appeals against orders under CGST/SGST Acts. Whether the court can exercise jurisdiction under Art. 226 to permit the filing of appeals beyond the statutory time limit. Whether the petitioner's reasons for delay are justified. Whether the judgment in Ketan V. Parekh case applies to the present case. Whether extraordinary circumstances exist to grant relief to the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought relief for the delay in filing appeals against orders under the CGST/SGST Acts, citing health issues as the reason for the delay. The petitioner filed the appeals four years after the issuance of the orders, leading to a challenge regarding the timeliness of the appeal. The petitioner requested the court to exercise jurisdiction under Art. 226 to permit the filing of appeals beyond the statutory time limit, emphasizing the liberal consideration of applications for condonation of delay. The Government Pleader opposed the relief, highlighting the significant delay in filing the appeal and questioning the credibility of the medical certificate provided by the petitioner.

The court referred to the judgment in Singh Enterprises v. CCE and Ors, emphasizing the limitations on extending time limits for filing appeals under the CGST/SGST Acts. Additionally, the court discussed the principles outlined in the Ketan V. Parekh case, where the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 could be extended in exceptional cases. The court noted that the exercise of jurisdiction to permit appeals filed beyond the statutory time limit is rare and requires extraordinary circumstances, as highlighted in previous judgments.

The court considered the petitioner's argument in light of the observations made in the B.C. Chaturvedi case, emphasizing the power of courts to do complete justice in exceptional cases. In the present case, the court found no extraordinary circumstances warranting the grant of relief to the petitioner. The court also addressed the delay in filing the writ petition under Article 226, emphasizing the importance of timely approach to the court. Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ petition, citing the lack of extraordinary circumstances and the significant delay in seeking relief.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the stringent approach towards extending time limits for filing appeals under the CGST/SGST Acts, emphasizing the need for exceptional circumstances to warrant such relief. The court's decision was guided by previous judgments and principles of law governing the condonation of delay in filing appeals.

---