TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1016
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... inter alia, seeks quashing and setting aside of the Order-in-Appeal dated 07.08.2026 passed by the Appellate Authority-First, SGST, Jaipur, whereby the appeal preferred against the Order-in-Original dated 23.04.2025 was rejected. The petitioner further seeks condoning the delay in filing the appeal against the Order-in- Original dated 23.04.2025, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Circle- A, Jaipur-II, whereby GST demand of Rs. 6,63,64,636/- for Financial Year 2022-23, was raised on the account of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit due to non-payment of tax along with undisclosed transactions by the petitioner. The appeal against the said order was filed on 30.09.2025, i.e., after a delay of 40 days. However, the Appellate Authority vi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....They submit that the said order had been passed ex parte, without affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing on the merits and had never otherwise been communicated to them. 2.2 Learned counsels for the petitioner submit that upon acquiring knowledge of the said Order-in-Original, the petitioners preferred an appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act on 30.09.2025, along with an explanation for the delay. However, the appellate authority, without appreciating the circumstances in which the petitioners acquired knowledge of the order and without considering the explanation furnished by them, rejected the appeal solely on the ground of limitation. It is, therefore, contended that the delay in filing the appeal is bona fide and the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner. 7. In the judgments cited above, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits. 8. Aside above, reference may also be had to a Division Bench Judgment rendered by Punjab and Haryana High Court in case titled as Luxmi Traders versus Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors. [2026:PHHC099329:DB] in CWP No. 27139/2025, wherein based on elaborate discussion and deliberations thereof, following view has been taken. "60. On the basis of discussions and deliberations aforesaid, we come to the following conclusions:- (i) Service of SCN upon the petitioner/assessee concerned cannot be deemed suffici....