SIGNIFICANCE OF FORM GST APL-02

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Dear experts

Section 107 of the CGST Act provides an aggrieved person a right to file an appeal against any decision or order so passed by an adjudicating authority. The general upper time limit to file an appeal is three months from the date on which the said decision or is communicated to such person under Section 107(1) and another one month under Section 107(4) with condonation of delay.

Further in terms of Rule 108(3), a final acknowledgment shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02 by the FAA. Serial number 7 of FORM GST APL-02 reads as under:

7. Date of acceptance/rejection of appeal-

So once the appeal petition is accepted and posted for hearing by the FAA, it means prima facie it is free from all defects. That being the position, can FAA reject such appeal for the reason that it is time barred or filed beyond four months while disposing such appeal under Section 107[11]?

Assuming FAA is right in this regard, then what is the significance of indicating the acceptance of appeal by way of FORM GST APL-02 and then rejecting it after hearing under Section 107[11]? Is such rejection justifiable while disposing appeal rather than at the stage of initial scrutiny of appeal before issuing final acknowledgement in FORM GST APL-02?

Normally, aggrieved person is under the bona fide impression that, once a final acknowledgement is issued in FORM GST APL-02, the appeal filed by him is free from all defects. Examination of grounds is altogether a different segment for disposal of appeal.

Who is right and who is wrong in this case is the core issue in the subject query.

Experts to throw light to clear the doubts in the interest of such aggrieved persons.

AI Summary

Appeal acceptance in FORM GST APL-02 may not bar later rejection where communication dates show the appeal is time barred.
Whether issuance of a final acknowledgement in FORM GST APL-02 conclusively establishes that an appeal is free from defects or whether the FAA may later reject the appeal as time barred is contested. The discussion focuses on discrepancies between portal communication dates and FAA records, the proper meaning of the date of communication for computing limitation, the role of FAA scrutiny before issuing APL 02, and appropriate remedies-rectification being limited to apparent errors and appeal remedies being the primary recourse.