Court allows condonation of delay under medical grounds, directs appeal to be decided on merits without limitation bar

The HC upheld the appellate authority's rejection of the appeal on limitation grounds but, relying on SC precedent, allowed condonation of delay due to the petitioner's medical condition. The court directed the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal on merits without considering limitation, ensuring both parties receive a fair hearing. The appeal is to be disposed of expeditiously, preferably within three months. Petition allowed.

---

---

ISSUES:

Whether the delay in filing an appeal against cancellation of GST registration can be condoned despite the appeal being time-barred.Whether the appellate authority is justified in rejecting an appeal solely on the ground of limitation without considering the merits.Whether a writ petition can be entertained for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under the relevant GST provisions.The scope of judicial discretion in condoning delay in appeals related to GST registration cancellation.

RULINGS / HOLDINGS:

The delay in filing the appeal was condoned considering the petitioner's medical condition and circumstances causing the delay, directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits without delving into limitation.The appellate authority's rejection of the appeal solely on the ground of limitation was not deemed unjustified per se, but judicial precedent allows condonation of delay to ensure the right to a hearing is not deprived.It was held that "the powers to hear the appeal in terms of Section 107 of the Act would not be subject to filing of an appeal within the time prescribed," and a writ petition can be filed for condonation of delay.The appeal must be decided expeditiously with a fair hearing to both parties, preferably within three months from the date of the order.

RATIONALE:

The Court relied on the legal framework under the GST Act, particularly Section 107, which governs appeals against cancellation of registration, and the principle that denial of the right to appeal due to delay could leave the aggrieved party remedy-less.Reference was made to a prior judgment emphasizing that "the provisions of the said Act, 2017 are for the purpose of providing relief to the businessman in an appropriate matter," highlighting the need to balance finality with availability of efficacious remedies.The Court applied the doctrine established in the Supreme Court judgment in M/s Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Punjab, supporting judicial discretion to condone delay in appropriate cases.The decision reflects a doctrinal approach that limitation should not be an absolute bar where substantial justice and fairness require condonation, especially when supported by medical evidence and genuine hardship.

---