https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785904 High Court exercised extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction to condone delay in filing a statutory GST appeal, finding that the delay resulted from counsel/consultant accountant negligence and that a litigant should not be penalised for such professional default; consequence: the court allowed relief and enabled the appellant to pursue statutory remedies. The court held that permanent exclusion from the GST framework for missed appellate deadlines or cancelled registration, despite willingness to comply by filing returns and paying dues, would frustrate the facilitative object of the regime and impose disproportionate hardship on livelihood; consequence: restoration or relief is appropriate to avoid violation of equality and personal liberty. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785904 High Court exercised extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction to condone delay in filing a statutory GST appeal, finding that the delay resulted from counsel/consultant accountant negligence and that a litigant should not be penalised for such professional default; consequence: the court allowed relief and enabled the appellant to pursue statutory remedies. The court held that permanent exclusion from the GST framework for missed appellate deadlines or cancelled registration, despite willingness to comply by filing returns and paying dues, would frustrate the facilitative object of the regime and impose disproportionate hardship on livelihood; consequence: restoration or relief is appropriate to avoid violation of equality and personal liberty. Case-Laws GST Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785904