Judgment
[2026:RJ-JP:33360-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15738/2026 CNR: RJHC020740342026 | URN: CW / 33503U / 2026 O P Khanna & Sons., Through Its Partner/ Authorized Signatory Richin Khanna S/o Sunil Khanna Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of 73, Block - J, 11, Rajour Garden, Tagore Garden, Delhi - 110027 ----Petitioner Versus 1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Of Finance, Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur 2.
Joint Commissioner (State Tax) Circle A, Jaipur II, Divisional Kar Bhawan Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur- 30204 3.
Union Of India, Through Principal Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, New Delhi 4.
Commissioner, Appellate Authority, Jaipur - II, Appeal, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Ayush Singh & Mr. Apurva Kumar Maheshwari for UOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order(Oral) 20/08/2026 Per: Arun Monga, J.
1.
The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks quashing and setting aside the impugned Order dated 27.11.2025, passed by the learned Joint Commissioner (State Tax), Circle A, Jaipur, whereby GST demand of Rs.
[2026:RJ-JP:33360-DB] (2 of 5) [CW-15738/2026] 30,20,002/- for Financial Year 2021-2022, was raised on the account of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit by the petitioner. The appeal against the said order could not per force be filed before the Appellate Authority as the online status of the appeal would reveal that the same is time-barred. The petitioner is thus left remediless. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this instant writ petition on 30.07.2026.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Show Cause Notice dated 12.09.2025 was issued under Section 73, alleging wrongful/excess availment of ITC as compared to the credit reflected in GSTR-2A and short declaration of turnover in GSTR-3B as compared to the turnover reflected in the TDS certificates in GSTR-7A. He submits that the notice was merely uploaded on the GST portal and was not otherwise effectively served, due to which the petitioner remained unaware of the proceedings and could not file a reply. The consequential impugned Order dated 27.11.2025 was also merely uploaded on the GST portal and was not effectively communicated to the petitioner.
2.1 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner-firm's partners have limited knowledge of computers and are unable to independently access the GST portal. Accordingly, the petitioner had been relying upon its Chartered Accountant, Shri Jinder Sehgal, for GST compliances since its registration, with his e-mail ID and mobile number registered on the portal for communications. During the relevant period, the Chartered Accountant's wife was suffering from prolonged illness and ultimately expired on 03.03.2026, due to which he was under severe mental distress and could not communicate the aforesaid notice and order to the petitioner. The impugned order was brought to the petitioner's knowledge only on 22.06.2026, whereafter the petitioner immediately
[2026:RJ-JP:33360-DB] (3 of 5) [CW-15738/2026] took steps to file the appeal, but by then the statutory period had expired and the appeal could not be filed on the GST portal.
2.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submits that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, but occasioned by the aforesaid bona fide circumstances. He submits that mere uploading of the notice and order on the GST portal, without effective communication through any other recognised statutory mode, deprived the petitioner of an opportunity to respond. He further submits that the impugned order was passed in violation of Section 75(4) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017 and the principles of natural justice, as no opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner.
3.
Heard and perused the case file.
4.
At the outset, learned counsels for the respondents object to the maintainability of the writ petition herein stating that the alternative remedy as provided under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, has not been availed.
5.
Statutory remedy by way of an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 before the Appellate Authority is provided against the impugned Order dated 27.11.2025. For ready reference, Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 reads as under:- “Section 107. Appeals to Appellate Authority.- (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person."
x-x-x-x-x
[2026:RJ-JP:33360-DB] (4 of 5) [CW-15738/2026] 6.
In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to directly entertain the writ petition without the petitioner exhausting its alternate statutory remedy.
7.
The facts on record reveal that the instant writ petition was filed against the impugned Order on 30.07.2026, i.e., after a delay of 125 days beyond the statutory period prescribed for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017. Having considered the reasons stated by learned counsels for the petitioner, we are satisfied that the delay occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner.
8.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s M R Traders v. UOI1, M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors2, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors.3, RPC PSIPL JV Vs.
State of Rajasthan & Ors4 and RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors5 argues that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by this Court.
9.
In the judgments cited above, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits even if, the same were time barred, provided sufficient cause was shown.
10.
Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the appeal on merits, provided 1 2026 SCC OnLine RAJ 2115 2 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3938 3 D.B. CWP 14658/2024 4 D.B. CWP 7260/2025 5 D.B. CWP 11794/2025
[2026:RJ-JP:33360-DB] (5 of 5) [CW-15738/2026] the same is filed within 30 days of the instant order being uploaded on the website of this court.
11.
Disposed of accordingly, with liberty as above.
12.
All pending application(s) also stand disposed of.
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (ARUN MONGA),J 2/Mohita/Parshant