Global Dried Flowers vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Held

The Court held that in terms of Rule 108(3) of the Central Goods and Services Rules 2017, the date of issuance of the provisional acknowledgement is to be considered the date of filing of the appeal. The Court noted that in this case, the provisional acknowledgement was issued on 27th March 2023, which was within the time prescribed for filing the appeal against the order dated 6th February 2023. Therefore, the Court found that there was no delay in filing the appeal. The reasoning was based on a direct interpretation of Rule 108(3). The ratio decidendi is that a provisional acknowledgement issued under Rule 108(3) conclusively determines the date of filing of an appeal for the purpose of timeliness. The Court set aside the impugned order dated 26th March 2024 and remanded the matter back to the appellate authority for reconsideration of the appeal on merits. The appellate authority was directed to dispose of the appeal on merits as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six weeks from the date of communication of the order.

Facts

The petitioner, Global Dried Flowers, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 26th March 2024, passed under Section 107 of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was aggrieved by a refund rejection order dated 6th February 2023, for the tax period January 2022 to February 2022. The petitioner filed an appeal on 27th March 2023. Subsequently, the petitioner was asked to submit a physical copy of the appeal, which was done on 5th October 2023. The appellate authority treated the date of physical submission (5th October 2023) as the filing date, deeming the appeal time-barred, despite the petitioner having received a provisional acknowledgement on 27th March 2023, which, according to Rule 108(3) of the Central Goods and Services Rules 2017, should be considered the date of filing. The petitioner argued that the appellate authority relied on un-amended provisions of Rule 108(3). The respondents acknowledged the issuance of a provisional acknowledgement within the prescribed time.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority erred in treating the date of physical submission of the appeal (5th October 2023) as the date of filing, instead of the date of the provisional acknowledgement (27th March 2023), thereby deeming the appeal time-barred, in light of Rule 108(3) of the Central Goods and Services Rules 2017? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on Rule 108(3)). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the appellate authority's decision was perverse as it relied on the un-amended provisions of Rule 108(3) of the said Rules. They argued that the provisional acknowledgement issued in terms of Rule 108(3) should be considered the date of filing, and therefore, the appeal was filed within the time limit. They sought a remand to the appellate authority or a hearing on merits. Respondents' arguments: The respondents acknowledged that a provisional acknowledgement was issued upon filing the appeal and that this acknowledgement was issued within the time prescribed for filing the appeal.