Anand Kumar Hirawat vs. The Senior Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Wbgst, Burrabazar Circle And Ors.

Held

The Court held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, is applicable to appeals filed under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017. The Court reasoned that Section 107 does not expressly or impliedly exclude the application of the Limitation Act, 1963, by virtue of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. Therefore, the prescribed period of 30 days plus a discretionary period of 30 days for filing an appeal is not final, and the Appellate Authority can extend the period for filing the appeal in given facts and circumstances. The Court found the petitioner's case meritorious, considering the procedural irregularities and the arbitrary nature of the actions. The appellate order rejecting the appeal solely on delay was quashed. The Appellate Authority was directed to consider and decide the petitioner's application for condonation of delay on merits and, if accepted, to hear and dispose of the appeal on merit.

Facts

The petitioner, Anand Kumar Hirawat, operating as M/s Anand Impez, is a Registered Taxable Person under GST. Respondent No. 1 initiated proceedings under Section 73 for the period April 2018 to March 2019, alleging short payment of tax and excess ITC availed, leading to a demand of ₹11,61,287 plus interest. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued on September 21, 2023, with an enhanced interest amount. The petitioner failed to respond to the SCN due to issues with their tax consultant. On November 23, 2023, Respondent No. 1 passed an adjudication order demanding ₹23,51,801, including tax, interest, and penalty. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107 on June 10, 2024, with a pre-deposit, explaining the delay. Respondent No. 2 rejected the appeal on July 9, 2024, solely on grounds of delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, is applicable to appeals filed under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017, allowing for condonation of delay beyond the prescribed period. 2. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the merits of the explanation provided for the delay. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that Section 107 of the GST Act does not expressly or impliedly exclude the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. They relied on the judgment in S. K. Chakraborty & Sons Vs. Union of India to argue that the Appellate Authority has the power to condone delay. The petitioner also cited genuine hardships, including the negligence of their tax consultant and lack of prior knowledge, as reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State/Revenue.