Sharmistha Dutta Proprietor Of M/S. Infotech Lab vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Smt. Sharmistha Dutta, proprietor of M/s. Infotech Lab, challenged an order dated 22nd November, 2022, passed by the Appellate Authority under the CGST Act. The appeal was dismissed due to an alleged delay of 24 months from the date of the original order dated 1st August, 2020. The Appellate Authority noted that the certified copy of the order was submitted after 24 months. However, the Appellate Authority also recorded that the remaining period of limitation from 1st March, 2022, would be completed after 90 days on 29th May, 2022. The petitioner had filed the appeal on 25th February, 2022. The petitioner also stated that her registration was cancelled due to non-filing of returns, but she had since paid all tax dues up to the cancellation date and deposited approximately Rs. 24 lakhs, which was lying in her Electronic Cash Ledger.

Held

The Court held that the Appellate Authority's finding of a 24-month delay in filing the appeal was perverse and demonstrated a total non-application of mind. The Court noted the contradiction within the Appellate Authority's own order, which stated that the remaining period of limitation from 1st March, 2022, would expire on 29th May, 2022, while the appeal was filed on 25th February, 2022. The Court found this calculation to be erroneous. Considering the facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, the Court decided not to adopt a hyper-technical view. The Court directed the respondent authority to restore the petitioner's registration and open the portal for 30 days from the date of restoration. This restoration is conditional upon the petitioner paying all revenue arrears and dues and filing returns within the stipulated period. Failure to comply would allow the respondent authority to block the portal and take further action as per law. If the order is complied with, the portal will remain unblocked beyond the 30-day period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority's finding of a 24-month delay in filing the appeal was perverse and demonstrated a non-application of mind, given its own contradictory findings regarding the remaining period of limitation and the date of filing. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the Appellate Authority's finding of a 24-month delay was self-contradictory and perverse. They argued that the Appellate Authority itself recorded that the remaining period of limitation from 1st March, 2022, would expire on 29th May, 2022, while the appeal was filed on 25th February, 2022. This indicated a clear miscalculation and lack of application of mind by the Appellate Authority. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the CGST Authority or the Union of India regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal.