TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Condonation of Delay in Filing GST Appeal: Legal Framework and Judicial Developments
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondonation of Delay in Filing GST Appeal: Legal Framework and Judicial Developments<br>By: - MOHIT GUPTA<br>Goods and Services Tax - GST<br>Dated:- 5-8-2025<br>Introduction The right to appeal is a cardinal component of the principles of natural justice. It ensures that no litigant suffers from arbitrary decisions of quasi-judicial or judicial authorities without recourse to a higher forum. An appeal is a statutory remedy that allows a party aggrieved by a decision to request a superior authority to re-examine the matter, either on questions of fact or law. In the context of Goods and Services Tax (GST) law, appeals serve to address grievances arising from adjudication by tax authorities. However, the filing of such appeals is governed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... strict timelines, and any delay must be condoned by competent authority based on sufficient cause. This article examines the statutory framework, judicial interpretation, and application of condonation of delay in GST appeals, with reference to Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Statutory Framework: Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 Time Limit for Filing Appeals - Section 107(1), CGST Act, 2017 Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides: "Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person." Condonation of Delay - Section 107(4), CGST Act, 2017 Section 107(4) empowers the Appellate Authority to condone delay in the following terms: "The Appellate Authority may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of three months, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month." Thus, a combined reading of sub-sections (1) and (4) reveals that the maximum time available to file an appeal, including condonation, is four months from the date of communication of the impugned order. Communication of Order: Determination ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Date A recurring dispute pertains to the determination of the date of communication of an order, which triggers the limitation period. As per Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017, communication of any decision, order, summons, or notice can be effected by several means, including: * Uploading on the GST portal; * Sending via registered email; * Personal service; * Publication in newspapers or affixation. Judicial precedents have held that the earliest mode of service-for instance, uploading on the GST portal-will be treated as the date of communication. In Partha Pratim Dasgupta Versus The Joint Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. - 2024 (6) TMI 666 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, it was held that the date of uploading on the GST portal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....constituted valid communication, even if the email was received later. Condonation of Delay: Limitation Act, 1963 and GST Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 states: "Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within such period." The term "sufficient cause" is not statutorily defined, leaving it to judicial discretion. Courts have recognized various grounds constituting sufficient cause, such as: * Serious illness; * Imprisonment; * Legal misadvice; * Natural calamities; * Acts of God; * Delay in ob....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....taining certified copies or relevant documents. In S.K. Chakraborty & Sons Versus Union of India & Ors. - 2023 (12) TMI 290 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, held that Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 does not exclude the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, either expressly or by necessary implication. Consequently, it was ruled that the Appellate Authority is empowered to consider condonation of delay in filing an appeal even beyond the prescribed period of three months plus one month under Section 107(4), provided sufficient cause is demonstrated by the appellant. In Partha Pratim Dasgupta Versus The Joint Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. - 2024 (6) TMI 666 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT,, the Calc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utta High Court condoned a 66-day delay in filing an appeal, beyond the additional one-month condonable period under Section 107(4). The delay was attributed to lack of knowledge in using the GST Portal. The appellate authority had rejected the appeal on grounds of limitation. Upon writ petition, the High Court ruled in favor of the taxpayer, noting that Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies in the absence of an express exclusion in the GST law. In Arvind Gupta Versus Assistant Commissioner of Revenue State Taxes, Cooch Behar Charge & Ors. - 2024 (1) TMI 1096 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT held that Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 does not expressly or impliedly exclude the application of the Limitation Act, 1963. Consequently, Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 5 of the Limitation Act, which allows for condonation of delay upon showing sufficient cause, is applicable to GST appeals, and therefore, the appellate authority is empowered to condone delay in filing an appeal even beyond the additional one-month period stipulated in Section 107(4). The Court affirmed that in the absence of express exclusion, the beneficial provisions of the Limitation Act must be given full effect to uphold the principles of justice and fairness. Judicial Precedents: Key Decisions * M/s. Sathya Furnitures, Represented by Gurunathan Sankar, Proprietor Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Salem. - 2023 (4) TMI 701 - MADRAS HIGH COURT Hon'ble HIGH COURT OF MADRAS held that condoned a delay of one week i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n filing a GST appeal, which had occurred due to an error by the assessee's accountant. The Court observed that taxpayers should not be penalized for the mistakes of their representatives and underscored that procedural timelines must not override substantive justice. This decision reflects the broader judicial approach of prioritizing fairness and equity over strict technicalities, especially where no mala fide intent or deliberate delay is established. * TVL. DEEPA TRADERS Versus DY. COMMR. (ST), GST-APPEAL, CHENNAI - 2025 (3) TMI 1388 - MADRAS HIGH COURT Hon'ble HIGH COURT OF MADRAS condoned a delay of 285 days in filing a GST appeal, which had been earlier rejected by the Appellate Authority on grounds of limitation. The Court h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eld that since the assessee had demonstrated a reasonable cause for the delay, the rejection was not sustainable, and the delay ought to be condoned. The High Court accordingly directed the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeal on merits, reinforcing the principle that substantial justice must prevail over procedural technicalities where sufficient cause is shown. * M/s. Millenium Cement Company Private Limited Versus Superintendent, Central Goods And Services Tax And Central Excise, Rajgant Range, Jalpaiguri Division And Ors. - 2024 (6) TMI 549 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT Hon'ble Calcutta High Court held that where a demand order was passed on 08.02.2022 and the appeal was filed on 21.07.2022, the appellate authority erroneously r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ejected the appeal citing a delay of 152 days. The Court observed that after deducting the statutory appeal period of 90 days, the actual delay was only 53 days, which warranted condonation in view of earlier decisions in S.K. Chakraborty & Sons v. Union of India and Arvind Gupta v. Asstt. Commissioner of Revenue, State Taxes. Accordingly, the High Court held that such delay was liable to be condoned and set aside the impugned orders. Conclusion * Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 mandates filing an appeal within three months, extendable by one month, from the date of communication of the order. * Communication of order is deemed to occur on the earliest date of service, including uploading on the GST portal. * Courts have held that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the absence of express exclusion, Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to GST matters, enabling condonation of delay beyond four months in deserving cases. * Taxpayers must provide sufficient cause to justify any delay in filing, supported by cogent evidence. * Judicial discretion, exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, may condone delays where statutory appellate remedies are exhausted or unavailable. In light of the above, while litigation must come to a closure within reasonable timeframes, the principle of equity and justice demands that genuine cases of delay not be prejudiced by procedural technicalities, particularly where no mala fide intent or undue advantage is evident.<br> Scholarly articles for know....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ledge sharing by authors, experts, professionals ....