Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

Appellate order passed after one year from filing of appeal

HimangshuKumar Ray

Appeal filed in due time. Appeal hearing notice issued in online portal only in one time, no adjournment granted, appellant missed the appeal hearing notice, appellate authority passed the appellate order beyond one year from the date of filing of appeal. According to section 107(13) appeal shall hear and decide within one year from the filing of appeal. here Appellate order is barred by limitation. is there any judgement under gst law or Service tax law, or CE law, Customs law. kindly guide.

Debate over Validity of Appellate Order Issued After One-Year Period under Section 107(13) of CGST Act, 2017 An individual raised a query regarding the appellate order issued over a year after an appeal was filed under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework, questioning its validity given the one-year decision period stipulated in Section 107(13) of the CGST Act, 2017. Responses varied, with some emphasizing that the one-year timeframe is not mandatory due to the phrase 'where it is possible.' Others highlighted that multiple adjournments for personal hearings are mandatory under Sections 107(8) and 107(9), citing case laws supporting this. The discussion suggested addressing procedural lapses in personal hearings rather than focusing solely on the time limit. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues