M/S White Mountain Trading PVT. LTD. vs. Additional Commissioner, CGST Appeals-Ii, Delhi

Facts

The petitioner, M/s White Mountain Trading Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 15.01.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, CGST Appeals-II, Delhi. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an order in original dated 04.05.2023, holding it to be barred by limitation. The Commissioner Appeals noted that the statutory period for filing an appeal under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, expired on 03.08.2023. The appeal was physically filed on 25.09.2023, which was over a month beyond the due date. The Commissioner Appeals concluded that a delay exceeding one month could not be condoned under Section 107(4) of the Act. The petitioner contended that the appeal was initially filed online on 02.09.2023, and the physical filing on 25.09.2023 was a subsequent step.

Held

The Court held that the date of filing of an appeal is to be reckoned from the date of its initial submission through the online mode, provided all other statutory requirements are met. In this case, the petitioner filed the appeal online on 02.09.2023. The physical filing on 25.09.2023 was a subsequent procedural step. Therefore, the delay in filing the appeal did not exceed one month. Consequently, the Commissioner Appeals was empowered under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act to consider the application for condonation of delay. The Commissioner Appeals had erroneously dismissed the appeal solely on the ground that the delay was beyond the prescribed limit for condonation, without considering the application on merits. The Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Commissioner Appeals to consider the application for condonation of delay in accordance with law. The Court explicitly stated that it had not considered or commented on the merits of the case or the delay condonation application.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the petitioner was barred by limitation under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, considering the online and physical filing dates. 2. Whether the Commissioner Appeals erred in holding that the delay in filing the appeal exceeded the condonable period under Section 107(4) of the Act. The petitioner argued that the date of filing should be considered the date of the initial online submission on 02.09.2023, which was within the one-month condonable delay period. They relied on the established practice that online filing is the primary mode, followed by physical submission. The respondent revenue authority's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but their position was that the appeal was filed beyond the permissible limit for condonation.