Strict statutory limitation and limited condonation blocked a delayed GST appeal, while natural justice challenge failed on the hearing record.

Under the West Bengal GST Act, a 394-day delay in filing the statutory appeal could not be condoned because Section 107 permits condonation only within a limited statutory grace period and the explanation for delay was unsatisfactory. The challenge based on breach of natural justice also failed, as the record showed a detailed show cause notice fixing a hearing date and no appearance by the taxpayer. No interference was warranted, and the writ challenge to the appellate order failed in full.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a delay of 394 days in preferring the statutory appeal under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be condoned. (ii) Whether the assessment order was vitiated for breach of natural justice on the alleged absence of a proper hearing notice.

Issue (i): Whether a delay of 394 days in preferring the statutory appeal under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be condoned.

Analysis: The appeal was filed far beyond the prescribed period. The statutory scheme under Section 107 permits filing within the regular period and allows condonation only up to the limited grace period under Section 107(4). The explanation offered for the delay was found unsatisfactory, and entertaining such a belated appeal would render the statutory limitation and the restricted condonation provision ineffective.

Conclusion: The delay could not be condoned and the issue was decided against the petitioner.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessment order was vitiated for breach of natural justice on the alleged absence of a proper hearing notice.

Analysis: The challenge based on natural justice did not survive because the detailed show cause notice directed the petitioner to appear on the specified date, but no appearance was made. On that basis, the alleged denial of hearing was not established.

Conclusion: The order was not found to be vitiated on the ground of breach of natural justice, and this issue was decided against the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: No interference was warranted in the writ proceedings, and the challenge to the appellate order failed in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute prescribes a strict outer limit for condonation of delay in filing an appeal, the court cannot enlarge that limit in the absence of cogent justification; an unserved or unaccepted claim of denial of hearing will not succeed where the record shows issuance of a detailed notice fixing the date of appearance.

---