M/S. Asika Fintrade PVT. LTD., Barbil, Kendujhar vs. Asst. Commissioner CT And GST, Barbil Circle, Kenojhar
Held
The High Court found the rejection order for rectification to be untenable as it was not properly communicated to the petitioner and there were discrepancies in its issuance. The Court quashed the rejection order.
Facts
The petitioner's appeal against a GST order was rejected due to delay. Subsequently, an application for rectification of the original order was filed but rejected. The petitioner claims they were not communicated the rejection order for rectification.
Key Issues
Whether the rejection order for rectification was validly communicated to the petitioner and if the technical glitches cited were a valid reason for non-communication.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 107, Section 161
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 21.08.2026 (Hybrid Mode)
1. Pursuant to show cause notice dated 22.12.2023 under Section 73 of the of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “GST Act”) an Order dated 29.04.2024 was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Barbil Circle, Jajpur, against which the petitioner filed an appeal. Said Appeal got rejected by order dated 17.07.2025 on the ground of delay in approaching the appellate authority under Section 107 of the
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.