GST appeal remand requires merits-based hearing; limitation rejection set aside and fresh decision directed.

The appellate authority could not reject the GST appeal as time-barred after a prior remand directing a de novo decision with a reasoned speaking order and due hearing, because that direction necessarily required merits-based adjudication. The subsequent limitation-based rejection was inconsistent with the remand and defeated its purpose. The High Court set aside the impugned orders and directed the appellate authority to hear the appeal afresh, ignore the delay in filing, and decide the matter on merits after affording due opportunity to all stakeholders.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Authority was justified in rejecting the GST appeal as time-barred after earlier remand directions, and whether the matter required reconsideration on merits.

Analysis: The prior order required the Appellate Authority to proceed de novo and pass an appropriate, reasoned and speaking order after giving due opportunity of hearing, which necessarily contemplated adjudication of the appeal on merits. The subsequent rejection on the ground of limitation did not answer the earlier direction and defeated the purpose of the remand. The Court therefore set aside the impugned orders and directed the Appellate Authority to hear the appeal afresh, ignoring the delay in filing, and to decide it by a speaking and reasoned order after affording due hearing to all stakeholders.

Conclusion: The rejection of the appeal as time-barred was unsustainable, and the matter was directed to be heard de novo and decided on merits in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appellate proceedings were restored for a merits-based decision, and the delay objection was not permitted to prevent substantive adjudication.

---