TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 97
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 2025 (hereinafter, the 'judgment') passed in a batch of matters titled M/s Addichem Speciallity LLP v. Special Commissioner I, Department of Trade and Taxes Anr. (2025:DHC;737-DB). 3. Vide the said judgment, the Court inter alia decided the issue, whether delay can be condoned in an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. On this issue, it was held that the delay is not condonable. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder: "69. In summary, the power to condone delay caused in pursuing a statutory remedy would always be dependent upon the statutory provision that governs. The right to seek condonation of delay and invoke the discretionary power inhering in an appellate authority would depend upon whether th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7". This makes the order of cancellation a nullity as Goods and Services Tax Network is not a proper officer and this order. Therefore, it has to be treated as unsigned document and as such the SCN dated 03.02.2023 and impugned order dated 18.04.2023 are not official documents/orders and as such bad in law. X X X (H) The Ld. Appellate Authority had erred in law in dismissing appeal on the reasoning appeal is time barred when no signed order by Proper Officer had been issued and period to file Appeal will run when copy of signed order is delivered." 5. It is the submission of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that in the judgment, apart from the issue of delay no other contentions of the Petitioner have been consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 29 (2) of the CGST Act, rendering it legally flawed. 25. Aggrieved by the cancellation of the Registration Certificate, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority on 18.10.2023, which was rejected on 09.01.2024 for being time-barred. 26. The petitioner contends that the Registration Certificate was suspended on the same day the Show SCN dated 03.02.2023 was issued, and no order revoking the suspension was passed within a reasonable time. Instead, the impugned cancellation order was arbitrarily issued after a prolonged period on 18.04.2023. The cancellation, citing non-filing of returns for a continuous period of six months, lacks statutory backing as it does not fall within the causes outlined in Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was appealable by the Petitioner in terms of Section 107 of the CGST within a period of 3+1 months i.e., 4 months from the date the order was communicated to the person concerned. Thus, the limitation period for filing the said appeal expired on 17th August, 2023. However, the appeal was filed on 18th October, 2023, which was rejected by the Appellate Authority on the ground that the same was barred by limitation. 9. Before this Court, in view of the absence of the GST Appellate Tribunal, a writ petition being W.P.(C) 5650/2024 has been first preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the prayer in the writ petition was for setting aside of the impugned order dated 9th January, 2024 passed by the Office of the Commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as argued that the copy of the impugned order therein ought to have been signed by the concerned authority and the same not being signed, is invalid. The Gujarat High Court while considering the facts and contentions inter alia held that in view of the fact that the impugned order therein was uploaded on the GSTN portal which can only be done after verification by the concerned State Tax Officer, the said order is valid. The relevant portions of the oral order is set out herein: "4.2. It was therefore submitted that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to continue her business. In support of his submissions, reliance was placed on the following decisions raising the contention that SCNs and the Orders are to be signed by the ....