M/S Yakult Danone INDIA Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Yakult Danone India Pvt Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated January 17, 2025, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Goods and Services Tax. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The sole ground for dismissal was the non-submission of a self-certified copy of the order against which the appeal was filed. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that even if the defect were allowed to be cured, the date of filing would be considered the date of submission of the self-certified copy, rendering the appeal time-barred under Section 107(1) of the Act.

Held

The Court held that the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the sole ground of non-submission of a self-certified copy of the order was not justified, especially when the appeal was filed within the statutory period. The Court found the matter to be squarely covered by the decisions in M/s Himgiri Herbs and M/s Kissan Beej Kendra. The reasoning was that technical defects should not ordinarily bar the adjudication of appeals on merits, particularly when the substantive appeal was filed within time. The ratio decidendi is that appellate authorities should grant an opportunity to cure procedural defects like the non-submission of a self-certified copy, rather than dismissing the appeal outright, provided the original filing was within the limitation period. The Court set aside the impugned order dated January 17, 2025. The petitioner was granted liberty to file the self-certified copy of the order appealed against before the Appellate Authority within fifteen days from the date of the order. Upon such filing, the appeal is to be restored and decided on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground of non-submission of a self-certified copy of the order, when the appeal was otherwise filed within the prescribed time limit, is justified under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they had submitted their appeal via email on March 21, 2024, which was within the three-month period from the date of communication of the impugned order (December 22, 2023). They contended that the dismissal on the technical ground of not supplying a self-certified copy was unjustified. The petitioner relied on two coordinate bench decisions: M/s Himgiri Herbs versus Union of India and others (CWP-31391-2024) and M/s Kissan Beej Kendra versus Union of India and others (CWP-31911-2024), which had set aside similar dismissals and allowed petitioners to file self-certified copies within fifteen days, restoring and deciding the appeals on merits. Respondents' Contention: The learned counsel for the respondents was unable to deny the petitioner's submissions or distinguish the present case from the precedents cited.