BharatTaxGST

Assam Government Marketing Corporation Limited vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST Delhi, South Commissionerate And Ors

Original PDF →
W.P.(C)/5771/2026HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01018165202613 August 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN2 pages
For Petitioner: Mr.Adv.[Appearance not given]For Respondent: Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC along with Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Mr. Anish Mishra, and Mr. Hasan Haider, Advs. Mr. R. K. Shukla, Adv

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010181652026 + W.P.(C) 5771/2026, CM APPL. 28376/2026, CM APPL. 28377/2026, CM APPL. 28378/2026 ASSAM GOVERNMENT MARKETING CORPORATION LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Adv.[Appearance not given] versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CGST DELHI, SOUTH COMMISSIONERATE AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC along with Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Mr. Anish Mishra, and Mr. Hasan Haider, Advs. Mr. R. K. Shukla, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R %

13.08.

2026

1.

The facts of the present case reflect that the Appellate Authority has taken a myopic view while declining to condone the delay of nineteen (19) days in filing the Appeal.

2.

The Appellant is a State Government Undertaking. The Appellant had explained the reasons for the delay in the annexure accompanying the Appeal. However, the Appeal has been dismissed on the ground that no separate application seeking condonation of delay was filed.

3.

The Supreme Court in Bhagmal & Others v. Kunwar Lal & This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:50:17

Others2, has held that where the substantive application itself contains the necessary explanation for the delay, insistence upon a separate application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act may amount to adopting a hypertechnical approach.

4.

In the present case, the delay in filing the Appeal was only nineteen (19) days. The Appellant had explained that the Appeal could not be filed within time on account of shortage of funds, financial difficulties and losses.

5.

In these circumstances, the approach adopted by the Appellate Authority cannot be sustained. Consequently, the Impugned Order dated 27.02.2025 passed by the Appellate Authority is set aside. The delay of nineteen (19) days in filing the Appeal is condoned, and the Appellate Authority is directed to consider and decide the Appeal on merits.

6.

The parties, along with their respective counsel, are directed to appear before the Appellate Authority on 27.08.2026. 7. With these observations, the present Petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 13, 2026 s.godara/ad

2 (2010) 12 SCC 159 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:50:17

Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.