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>Appellate authority cannot reject appeal filed within condonable delay period under Section 107 CGST Act without hearing</h1> <h3>Melstar Metals, a proprietary concern of Mr. Santosh Laujari Gupta Versus The Union of India, The Commissioner of GST & C. Ex (Appeals – I), Mumbai.</h3> Melstar Metals, a proprietary concern of Mr. Santosh Laujari Gupta Versus The Union of India, The Commissioner of GST & C. Ex (Appeals – I), Mumbai. - ... Issues:1. Challenge to impugned order rejecting appeal2. Timeliness of appeal under Section 107 of CGST Act 20173. Breach of principles of natural justice and fair play4. Rejection of appeal without a hearing opportunity5. Condonation of delay in instituting appeal6. Setting aside impugned order and remanding the matterAnalysis:The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 31 January 2024, rejecting the appeal, despite having an alternate remedy available. The High Court noted a gross breach of natural justice and fair play, deciding not to relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy due to the circumstances. The proper officer raised an adjudication demand on 11 August 2023, leading to the petitioner filing a rectification application and subsequently an appeal within 108 days of the rejection of the rectification application.Regarding the timeliness of the appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act 2017, which mandates the appeal to be ordinarily instituted within 3 months, the High Court observed that the appeal was filed within 18 days of the expiry of the 3-month period, falling within the condonable period. The appellate authority's handling of the case was also scrutinized, noting that the petitioner was denied a proper hearing opportunity before the appeal was rejected as time-barred.The High Court found that the petitioner had sufficient cause for the delay in instituting the appeal and condoned the delay of 18 days. Consequently, the impugned order dated 31 January 2024 was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for a decision on the appeal's merits. The Court directed the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal following the law, leaving all contentions of the parties open for consideration.In conclusion, the High Court made the Rule absolute in the terms mentioned, with no orders as to costs, and instructed all concerned parties to act on an authenticated copy of the order for further proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
