<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (7) TMI 1187 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775119</link>
    <description>Bombay HC allowed petitioner&#039;s writ petition challenging rejection of GST appeal as time-barred. The appellate authority had rejected the appeal filed under Section 107(1) of CGST Act, 2017, considering physical filing date rather than online filing date. HC held that petitioner was not prejudiced by technical glitch during initial filing on 25 June 2024, and appeal was properly re-filed on 12 July 2024 within condonable period under Section 107. The appellate authority erred in considering physical filing date when GST Portal clearly showed re-filing date as 12 July 2024. HC emphasized that before dismissing appeal on limitation grounds, authority must provide notice and opportunity to parties for clarification. Following precedents in Siemens Ltd and Bytedance cases, HC quashed the impugned order and remanded matter to appellate authority for fresh consideration on merits, directing that appeal be disposed of in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2025 08:25:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1187 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775119</link>
      <description>Bombay HC allowed petitioner&#039;s writ petition challenging rejection of GST appeal as time-barred. The appellate authority had rejected the appeal filed under Section 107(1) of CGST Act, 2017, considering physical filing date rather than online filing date. HC held that petitioner was not prejudiced by technical glitch during initial filing on 25 June 2024, and appeal was properly re-filed on 12 July 2024 within condonable period under Section 107. The appellate authority erred in considering physical filing date when GST Portal clearly showed re-filing date as 12 July 2024. HC emphasized that before dismissing appeal on limitation grounds, authority must provide notice and opportunity to parties for clarification. Following precedents in Siemens Ltd and Bytedance cases, HC quashed the impugned order and remanded matter to appellate authority for fresh consideration on merits, directing that appeal be disposed of in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775119</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>