Rsd Natural Resources Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax And Ors.

Held

The Court held that while the petitioner's explanation for the delay was not fully satisfactory, an opportunity should be granted to present the appeal on merits. The Court reasoned that since the Tribunal was not yet functional, it was appropriate to allow the petitioner to press its appeal before the appellate authority. Therefore, the delay occasioned in preferring the appeal was condoned, subject to the petitioner fulfilling certain conditions. The appellate authority was directed to proceed to hear the appeal on merits. The order dated June 30, 2025, was to be considered of no effect if the petitioner complied with the terms. The Court did not decide the merits of the original order passed under Section 74.

Facts

The petitioner, RSD Natural Resources Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated June 30, 2025, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. This appellate order had dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an earlier order dated March 6, 2024, passed under Section 74 of the said Act. The dismissal by the appellate authority was solely on the ground of delay in filing the appeal. The petitioner contended that the delay was due to the illness of its Managing Director and claimed to possess evidence to support this. The appellate authority had rejected the explanation due to a lack of supporting evidence.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal solely on the ground of delay, considering the explanation provided for the delay. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was occasioned by the illness of its Managing Director. While the appellate authority found the explanation unsatisfactory due to a lack of evidence, the petitioner asserted that it possessed sufficient evidence to substantiate the illness and was prepared to present it. The petitioner also highlighted that the Tribunal, which would be the next appellate forum, was not yet functional, making the High Court the immediate recourse. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State or revenue authorities regarding the delay or the merits of the petitioner's case. The focus of the State's participation appears to have been in defending the order of the appellate authority.