Liberty Oil Mills Limited vs. Joint Commisioner (Appeals Thane) GST And Central Excise And Ors

Held

The Court held that the appeal filed by the Petitioner was not barred by limitation. The Court found that the Petitioner's case that the order dated 30 March 2023 was not served on 11 April 2023 but was obtained by them only on 17 August 2023 was credible. This conclusion was based on several factors: the Petitioner's prompt action in seeking a copy of the order upon learning of its existence via a show cause notice and filing an appeal within a month of receiving it. The Court also noted the potential deficiencies in the postal report, particularly the overwriting of figures, and the fact that the Petitioner had appealed another order received on 11 April 2023, indicating they were not inactive. The Petitioner gained no undue advantage. The Court set aside the impugned order of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) and restored the Petitioner's appeal to the file of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) for adjudication on merits. All contentions on merits were left open. The Petitioner agreed to donate Rs. 25,000/- to K.E.M. Hospital as CSR.

Facts

The Petitioner, Liberty Oil Mills Limited, challenged an order dated 27 January 2025 by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Thane. This order dismissed the Petitioner's appeal against an Assistant Commissioner's order dated 30 March 2023, citing it was filed beyond the three-month limitation period and the one-month condonable period. The Petitioner claimed the 30 March 2023 order was neither uploaded nor communicated. They only became aware of it when a show cause notice for a subsequent period was issued in August 2023. On 16 August 2023, the Petitioner requested a copy of the 30 March 2023 order, which was supplied on 17 August 2023. The appeal was filed on 11 September 2023. The Joint Commissioner (Appeals) relied on a postal report indicating communication on 11 April 2023, deeming the appeal time-barred under Section 107 of the MGST Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Petitioner on 11 September 2023 against the order dated 30 March 2023 was barred by limitation under Section 107 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (MGST Act)? Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner contended that the order dated 30 March 2023 was never served. They only obtained a copy on 17 August 2023, after receiving a show cause notice in August 2023. The appeal was filed within a month of receiving the copy. They also argued that the postal report, relied upon by the appellate authority, had deficiencies and was not effectively presented for their comment. The Petitioner pointed out that the postal report annexure suggested Figure 5 overwrote Figure 4, and on 11 April 2023, they received four documents, not five, and promptly appealed another order received that day. Revenue's arguments: The Revenue relied on the postal report which indicated that the order dated 30 March 2023 was communicated to the Petitioner on 11 April 2023, making the appeal filed on 11 September 2023 beyond the prescribed limitation period.