M/S Micro Zone vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the appeal filed by the petitioner, which was dismissed for delay, could be restored to the files of the Appellate Authority, provided the petitioner satisfies the conditions stipulated in Notification No. 53 of 2023- Central Tax. The Court referred to paragraphs 2 to 6 of the notification, which allow appeals to be filed up to January 31, 2024, and deem pending appeals as properly filed if they meet the conditions. Crucially, paragraph 3 of the notification requires the appellant to pay the admitted portion of tax, interest, fine, fee, and penalty, and 12.5% of the remaining disputed tax (with at least 20% of this 12.5% debited from the Electronic Cash Ledger), subject to a maximum of twenty-five crore rupees. The Court directed the petitioner to satisfy these conditions before January 31, 2024, for the appeal to be considered on merits. If these conditions are not met, the appeal would stand rejected. The Court also clarified that even writ petitions previously rejected solely on grounds of delay could be revisited under this notification if the conditions are met. The Commissioner, State Taxes, Bihar, was directed to issue instructions to officers regarding this.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Micro Zone, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) of State Tax, Purnea Division. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal filed under the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Act, 2017 (BGST Act) solely on the ground of delay. The appeal was filed beyond the extended period of one month permitted under Section 107 of the BGST Act for filing delayed appeals with a satisfactory explanation. The petitioner's appeal was rejected by the first Appellate Authority as being beyond even this extended period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's appeal, dismissed for being beyond the statutory period prescribed under Section 107 of the BGST Act, could be restored in light of Notification No. 53 of 2023- Central Tax dated 02.11.2023 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs? The petitioner argued that the aforementioned notification provides a special procedure for filing delayed appeals against orders passed under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act, extending the time for filing up to January 31, 2024, subject to certain conditions. The petitioner contended that this notification should be applied to their case, allowing for the restoration of their appeal. The respondents, represented by the Union of India and state tax authorities, did not explicitly record arguments against the application of the notification. However, the judgment implies that the initial rejection was based on the strict interpretation of Section 107 of the BGST Act.