Bhaskar Banerjee vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Bhaskar Banerjee, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated February 16, 2024, passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 106 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. This appellate order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an order dated July 26, 2023, passed under Section 73 of the said Act, solely on the grounds of delay. The petitioner contended that he was unaware of the show cause notice and the impugned order as they were uploaded on the GST Portal under the "Additional Notice and Orders" tab. He only became aware of the order upon receiving a message from his bank regarding the attachment of his bank account. The appeal was filed eight days beyond the condonable period.

Held

The Court held that the marginal delay of eight days in preferring the appeal before the Appellate Authority should be condoned. The Court reasoned that the petitioner could not be considered grossly negligent in pursuing his cause, given the circumstances of his alleged lack of knowledge of the GST portal uploads. The Court emphasized that disallowing the petitioner to press his appeal on merits would result in him losing an important forum of appeal. Consequently, the order dated February 16, 2024, passed by the Appellate Authority was set aside, and the petitioner's appeal was revived and restored to the file of the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority was directed to consider the petitioner's appeal on merits. Furthermore, any attachment of the petitioner's bank account, made on the strength of the adjudication order dated July 26, 2023, was ordered to be lifted in terms of Section 107(8) of the said Act of 2017.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay of eight days in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority, occasioned by the petitioner's alleged lack of knowledge of the GST portal uploads, should be condoned, turning on the interpretation of principles of natural justice and the provisions governing appeals under the GST Act. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that he did not have knowledge of the show cause notice and the impugned order because they were served by uploading them to the GST Portal under the "Additional Notice and Orders" tab. He only became aware of the order when his bank account was attached. He contended that the delay was marginal and not due to gross negligence, and that dismissing the appeal on this ground would deprive him of a forum to argue his case on merits. Revenue/State's argument: The judgment records no specific argument from the State regarding the delay or the merits of the case.