Fixed limitation for GST appeals bars belated filing, while conditional remand may still secure merits-based reconsideration.

Where the GST appeal statute fixes an outer limit for condonation, an appellate authority cannot entertain an appeal filed beyond that period, and belated filing remains fatal to limitation. The note also records that, in appropriate cases, a writ court may nevertheless set aside assessment orders and direct fresh adjudication on merits, subject to compliance with conditions such as further payment and filing of objections within time. The practical effect is that limitation bars the statutory appeal, while conditional remand may still be used to secure merits-based reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the belated appeals filed beyond the condonable period under the GST appeal provision could be entertained. (ii) Whether the impugned assessment orders should be quashed and the matters remanded for fresh consideration subject to compliance with specified conditions.

Issue (i): Whether the belated appeals filed beyond the condonable period under the GST appeal provision could be entertained.

Analysis: The appeals were filed 62 days beyond the condonable period. The petitioner had neither replied to the show-cause notices nor appeared for personal hearing. In the light of the settled position that the appellate authority cannot condone delay beyond the statutory limit, the rejection of the appeals on limitation was justified.

Conclusion: The rejection of the appeals as time-barred was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the impugned assessment orders should be quashed and the matters remanded for fresh consideration subject to compliance with specified conditions.

Analysis: The petitioner had already deposited the entire disputed tax for two months and part of the disputed tax for the remaining month. Taking note of this and the need to afford an opportunity to place objections on record, the Court exercised its discretion to set aside the impugned orders and direct fresh adjudication on merits. The relief was made conditional on further payment and filing of replies within the stipulated time.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were quashed and the matters were remanded for fresh orders on merits, subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained partial relief through quashing of the impugned orders and remand for fresh adjudication, while the finding that the appeal delay was not condonable remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute prescribes a fixed outer limit for condonation of delay, the appellate authority cannot entertain an appeal filed beyond that limit, but the writ court may still grant conditional remand to secure adjudication on merits in appropriate cases.

---