2025 (7) TMI 1187

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nkad,. ORAL JUDGMENT:   (PER M. S. SONAK, J. 1. Heard Mr. Sriram Sridharan, learned counsel for Petitioner, and Ms. Shruti Vyas, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3. 2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. In this Petition, the Petitioner is challenging an Order-in-Appeal dated 29 October 20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appeal on the GST portal, the portal had wrongly assigned the appeal to Respondent No. 3 instead of Respondent No. 2, to whom the Appeal should have been assigned. The GST Portal does not allow an assessee to choose the appellate forum to which the appeal is to be filed. Rather, the GST portal automatically allocates/assigns the appeal filed by an assessee to an appellate authority as per its i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y 2024, which is the date of physical filing of the appeal. 9. Firstly, the petitioner could not be prejudiced due to the technical glitch when the appeal was first filed on 25 June 2024. Secondly, it is clear from Exhibit-M that the appeal was re-filed on 12 July 2024 within the condonable period under Section 107. The Respondent No. 2 has erred in considering the date of physical filing, espe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... before concluding that the appeal was barred by limitation, should have at least heard the parties so that they could have explained why it was not barred by limitation. 12. As a matter of abundant caution, the petitioner had also filed an application seeking condonation of delay. The Appellate Authority did not hear the petitioner on this Application for condonation of delay. 13. For the a....