TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellate authority was justified in rejecting the GST appeal as time-barred without considering the pendency and disposal of the rectification application, and whether the matter required fresh adjudication of limitation.
Analysis: The challenge was to the appellate order rejecting the appeal under Section 107 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the ground of delay. The petitioner had filed a rectification application under Section 161 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against the original order, and the application was disposed of before the appeal was filed. The Court held that the limitation for the appeal had to be computed from the date following disposal of the rectification application, because that disposal directly affected the running of limitation. The appellate authority was therefore required to examine the entries made in the appeal form and the chronology of the rectification proceedings before branding the appeal as delayed. The Court also noted that while the appellate authority cannot condone delay beyond the statutory period, that principle did not justify ignoring a material event affecting the start of limitation.
Conclusion: The rejection of the appeal as time-barred was unsustainable; the impugned order was quashed and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for fresh decision after hearing the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a rectification application against the original order is pending or has been disposed of, the period of limitation for filing the GST appeal must be computed with reference to that disposal, and the appellate authority must consider that chronology before dismissing the appeal as delayed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
