Sr Projects vs. The Commissioner Of State Tax, Directorate Of Commercial Taxes, Governement Of West Bengal And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal solely on the grounds of delay. The Court noted that the petitioner had made out a case of illness during the period when the appeal was required to be filed. The delay was considered marginal, and the petitioner was not found to be grossly negligent. Consequently, the Court condoned the marginal delay. The order impugned dated August 30, 2024, was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the file of the appellate authority for fresh consideration on merits. Furthermore, since the petitioner had made the statutory pre-deposit and the appeal was being restored, the attachment of the petitioner's bank account, made on the strength of the adjudication order dated November 21, 2023, was ordered to be lifted. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, SR PROJECTS, challenged an order dated August 30, 2024, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an adjudication order dated November 21, 2023, passed under Section 73 of the said Act, solely on the grounds of delay. The petitioner contended that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the petitioner's serious indisposition during the relevant period. The appellate authority, while not disbelieving the illness, still refused to condone the delay. The petitioner also stated that their bank account was attached by the GST authorities based on the adjudication order, which was affirmed by the appellate authority's order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority erred in law by dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the grounds of delay, despite the petitioner providing a reason of serious indisposition for the delay? (Question of law turning on Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017). Arguments: Petitioner: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was marginal and caused by their serious illness during the statutory filing period. They contended that they were not grossly negligent and that the appellate authority should have condoned the delay, especially given the reason provided. Revenue/State: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State/Revenue regarding the dismissal of the appeal on grounds of delay.