Somnath Ray vs. Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax, CGST And C.Ex Commissionerate,Howrah And Ors

Facts

The applicant, Somnath Ray, sought to move a judgment and order dated January 30, 2024, which had dismissed his appeal in MAT 1126 of 2023. The applicant's counsel submitted that the client was now willing to make the pre-deposit and wished to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. A concern was raised that the appellate authority might reject the appeal on grounds of limitation if the pre-deposit was complied with. The writ petition was initially filed on February 13, 2023, disposed of on May 18, 2023, and the appeal was preferred on April 11, 2023, subsequently dismissed on January 30, 2024. The applicant is now ready to effect the pre-deposit.

Held

The Court allowed the application, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances. It noted the timeline of the writ petition, the appeal, and its subsequent dismissal, coupled with the applicant's present readiness to effect the pre-deposit. The Court directed the applicant to comply with the pre-deposit condition within three weeks from the receipt of the order's server copy and to file the appeal before the statutory appellate authority. Crucially, the Court ordered that if the appeal is filed, the appellate authority shall not reject it on the ground of limitation. Instead, the appellate authority is to dispose of the appeal on its merits and in accordance with the law, after providing the applicant with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant should be permitted to comply with the pre-deposit condition and file a statutory appeal, considering the dismissal of a prior appeal and the applicant's current willingness to deposit the required amount. 2. Whether the appellate authority should be directed to consider the appeal on merits, notwithstanding any potential delay, if filed after complying with the pre-deposit condition. Contentions of the Applicant: The applicant argued that he is now willing to effect the pre-deposit and should be allowed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. He expressed a genuine apprehension that the appellate authority might reject the appeal on the ground of limitation after he complies with the pre-deposit condition. Contentions of the Revenue/State: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state in response to this application.