https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426352 The AP HC allowed a petition seeking direction to the Appellate Authority to accept an endorsement certificate filed during pending appeal proceedings. The petitioner had not filed the endorsement certificate with the original refund application or the appeal, but submitted it later citing COVID-19 pandemic constraints. The court held that the petitioner could not have anticipated the pandemic situation within the two-year refund claim period. Relying on Rule 112(4) of CGST Rules and Section 107(11) of CGST Act, which empower appellate authorities to direct production of documents and conduct further inquiry, the court found circumstances justified accepting additional evidence at the appellate stage, particularly where due diligence was exercised but original filing was prevented by unforeseen circumstances. en-us Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Apr 2025 17:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426352 The AP HC allowed a petition seeking direction to the Appellate Authority to accept an endorsement certificate filed during pending appeal proceedings. The petitioner had not filed the endorsement certificate with the original refund application or the appeal, but submitted it later citing COVID-19 pandemic constraints. The court held that the petitioner could not have anticipated the pandemic situation within the two-year refund claim period. Relying on Rule 112(4) of CGST Rules and Section 107(11) of CGST Act, which empower appellate authorities to direct production of documents and conduct further inquiry, the court found circumstances justified accepting additional evidence at the appellate stage, particularly where due diligence was exercised but original filing was prevented by unforeseen circumstances. Case-Laws GST Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426352