M/S Dilip Kumar Singh, Sanjay Nagar, Bhojpur Colony vs. The Union Of INDIA

CWJC/5050/2023HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01028130202315 May 2023Bench: MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY,THE CHIEF JUSTICE-3 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dilip Kumar Singh, filed a writ petition challenging an appellate order dated 18.03.2023. This order rejected their appeal on the grounds of delay. The original order against which the appeal was filed was dated 29.11.2021. The Appellate Authority noted that Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, allows appeals within three months, with a further one-month period for condonation of delay with satisfactory reasons. The authority also considered the Supreme Court's order in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, which extended limitation periods due to the pandemic. The Supreme Court directed that appeals could be filed within ninety days from 01.03.2022. The petitioner's appeal was filed on 16.03.2023, approximately 260 days after the extended limitation period expired.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. The Appellate Authority correctly noted that Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, prescribes a limitation period for filing appeals and a further period for condonation of delay. The Court also acknowledged the Supreme Court's directions in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, which provided for an extension of limitation due to the pandemic. However, the petitioner failed to avail of these extended periods. The appeal was filed approximately 260 days after the expiry of the limitation period, even considering the Supreme Court's directions. The Court found no reason to invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, especially when alternate remedies exist and the petitioner had not been diligent in pursuing them within the stipulated time. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the grounds of delay, considering the provisions of Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 regarding the extension of limitation due to the pandemic. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner implicitly argued that their appeal should have been considered on merits, suggesting that the delay was either excusable or that the Appellate Authority did not properly consider the Supreme Court's directions on limitation extension. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through the Appellate Authority's order, argued that the appeal was filed significantly beyond the permissible time limits prescribed by Section 107 of the BGST Act and the Supreme Court's directions, and therefore, it was liable to be rejected on the ground of delay.

Sections Cited

Section 107

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5050 of 2023 ====================================================== M/s Dilip Kumar Singh, Sanjay Nagar, Bhojpur Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna through its Proprietor Dilip Kumar Singh, Aged about 55 Years, Gender Male, Son of Mithilesh Kumar Singh, Resident of Ashok Nagar, Bhojpur Colony, Ramlakhan Path, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi. 2. The Principal Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Path, Patna. 3. The State of Bihar, through the Commissioner, Department of State Taxes, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Additional Commissioner, State Tax (Appeal), Patna West Division, Patna. 5. The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Patna South Circle, District- Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar, Advocate For the UOI : Dr. K.N.Singh, A.S.G. Mr.Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC CGST & CX For the State : Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC 11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 15-05-2023 The writ petition is filed against the appellate order dated 18.03.2023 (Annexure-3) which was rejected on the ground of delay. The appeal was filed against Annexure-1 order dated 29.11.2021. 2. The appellate order specifically noticed Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“BGST Act”

2/3 hereafter) which permits an appeal to be filed within three months and also apply for delay condonation with satisfactory reasons within a further period of one month. The Appellate Authority also took into account the saving of limitation granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition ( C) No. 3 of 2020, In Re: Cognizance For Extension of Limitation. Therein, due to the pandemic situation limitation was saved between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022. It was also directed that an appeal could be filed within ninety days from 01.03.2022. Hence, an appeal could have been filed on or before 29.05.2022, which provision was not availed by the petitioner herein. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also declared that if a longer period than 90 days is provided in a Statute, then that longer period will apply. In the BGST Act, u/s 107(4) there is a provision for condonation of delay, if the appeal is filed delayed, within one month of expiry of limitation. Even if that be deemed to be appealable then the appeal ought to have been filed by 28.06.2022. The appeal is filed only on 16.03.2023 after 260 days from the date on which even the limitation period as stipulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, expired.

In the above circumstances, we find no reason to invoke the extraordinary juri iction under Article 226, 3/3 especially since it is not a measure to be employed where there are alternate remedies available and the assessee has not been diligent in availing such alternate remedies within the stipulated time.

The writ petition hence would stand dismissed

Sujit/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 18.05.2023 Transmission Date

Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.