Bona fide delay in GST appeal must be considered for condonation; limitation cannot be refused on an erroneous jurisdictional view.

A delayed GST statutory appeal accompanied by the required pre-deposit and a bona fide explanation for the delay was held to merit condonation. The Calcutta HC found no lack of good faith, noting that the appellant was a small partnership firm and had no advantage in filing late. The appellate authority erred in refusing to consider condonation on the mistaken view that delay could be excused only within one month beyond the prescribed period, which was inconsistent with binding precedent and amounted to failure to exercise jurisdiction. The rejection on limitation was set aside and the appeal was restored for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the statutory appeal under the GST enactments should be condoned and the appeal restored for decision on merits.

Analysis: The appeal was accompanied by the required pre-deposit and the delay was explained as arising from lack of proper knowledge of the GST portal. The delay was stated to be 79 days. The Court found no lack of bona fides, noted that the appellant was a small partnership firm and would not gain by filing a belated appeal, and held that the appellate authority ought to have considered the application for condonation of delay. The authority's view that delay could be condoned only if the appeal was filed within one month beyond the prescribed period was found inconsistent with binding precedent and amounted to failure to exercise jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the appellate order rejecting the appeal on limitation was set aside. The appeal was directed to be heard and disposed of on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a delayed statutory appeal is accompanied by bona fide conduct and a satisfactory explanation, the appellate authority must consider condonation on merits and cannot refuse jurisdiction on an erroneous view of the limitation power.

---