Judgment
[2026:RJ-JP:33101-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6055/2025 CNR: RJHC020334072025 | URN: CW / 14289U / 2025 1.
M/s Utpal Infra Project Llp, Being A Partnership Firm Having Its Office At Fifth Floor, Office No. 40 To 43, Sunny Mart, New Aatish Market, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302020 Through Its Duly Authorized Partner, Shri Ashish Kumar.
2.
Shri Ashish Kumar C/o Shri Gajraj Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Flat No. 404, Royal Kesal Apartment, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302021, In His Capacity Of Being A Citizen Of India.
----Petitioners Versus 1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary (Tax) Finance Department (Tax Division), 1St Floor, Main Building, Gate- 2, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005 2.
Union Of India, Through The Revenue Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 110001.
3.
Commissioner, Rajasthan Goods And Service Tax, Commercial Taxes Department, Kar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, C- Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005.
4.
Joint Commissioner, Rajasthan Goods And Service Tax Commercial Taxes Department Kar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005.
5.
Special Commissioner, Rajasthan Goods And Service Tax Commercial Taxes Department Kar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005.
6.
Assistant Commissioner, Rajasthan Goods And Service Tax Commercial Taxes Department Kar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005.
7.
The Appellate Authority, Rajasthan Goods And Service
[2026:RJ-JP:33101-DB] (2 of 6) [CW-6055/2025] Tax, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Mohit Khandelwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG, Ms. Chelsi Agarwal, AAAG Mr. Devesh Yadav, Adv. for Mr. Bharat Vyas, ASG, Mr. Rakesh Choudhary, Sr. CGPC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order(Oral) 19/08/2026 Per: Arun Monga, J.
1.
Petitioners herein, inter alia, seek revocation of the impugned appellate Order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority-III, State Tax, Jaipur, whereby the appeal preferred against the Order-in- Original dated 17.08.2023 was rejected. The petitioners further seek revocation of the Order-in-Original dated 17.08.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ward-ll, Circle-G, Jaipur III, whereby the GST registration of the petitioner no. 1 was canceled due to non-filing of returns. The appeal against the said Order-in-Original was filed on 22.08.2024, i.e., after a delay of 251 days. However, the Appellate Authority vide impugned order dated 05.09.2024 dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation as it does not have the power to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed the present writ petition on 15.04.2025.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the delay in filing the returns occurred due to bona fide circumstances and financial constraints. He submits that the petitioners could not file GSTR-3B for December 2022 to May 2023 and April to August 2023, pursuant to
[2026:RJ-JP:33101-DB] (3 of 6) [CW-6055/2025] which notices under Section 46 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017 were issued. Meanwhile, a Show Cause Notice dated 05.07.2023 was issued for cancellation of the GST registration and the registration was suspended with immediate effect. The registration was thereafter cancelled vide Order-in-Original dated 17.08.2023 under Section 29(2) (c) of the Act. He submits that while the notices under Section 46 were served on the petitioners, the Show Cause Notice dated 05.07.2023 and the Order-in-Original dated 17.08.2023 were only uploaded on the GST portal and were not effectively served on the petitioners.
2.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Petitioner No.1 took steps to regularise the default and filed GSTR-3B for December 2022 on 28.08.2023, for January to March 2023 on 14.07.2024 and for April-May 2023 on 05.08.2024. Petitioner No.2 also sought to immediately file an application for revocation of cancellation in Form REG-21, however, the application could not be filed as the GSTN portal reflected that the prescribed time for filing the same had expired.
He submits that despite cancellation of the registration, the petitioner was required to discharge tax liability for the period January 2023 to March 2024 through Form GST DRC-03 dated 31.05.2024, pursuant to which an acknowledgment dated 15.07.2024 was issued.
2.2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners obtained knowledge of the Order-in-Original dated 17.08.2023 only in the year 2024. Thereafter, the petitioners preferred an appeal on 22.08.2024 against the aforesaid order, which was dismissed on 05.09.2024 solely on the ground of limitation. He submits that the petitioner was again required to discharge tax liability for April 2024 through Form GST DRC-03 dated 21.12.2024, followed by acknowledgment dated 23.12.2024. He submits that the cancellation
[2026:RJ-JP:33101-DB] (4 of 6) [CW-6055/2025] order was passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, in violation of Section 75(4) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017 and principles of natural justice, while the appeal was also dismissed without consideration of the merits or the subsequent payment of tax liability.
3.
In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
4.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners, 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.
5.
Learned counsels for the respondents oppose the above submission and contends that the impugned appellate order has rightly been passed and appeal is now barred by limitation. Further, the cancellation order dated 17.08.2023 was duly communicated to the petitioner as the same was uploaded on the GST common portal. The petitioner had sufficient time and right to file an appeal against the same before the appellate authority, within the time limit prescribed 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:33101-DB] (5 of 6) [CW-6055/2025] under the Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, however, the petitioner failed to do so.
6.
Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, however, considering the reasons owing to which the petitioner could not submit its appeal within the stipulated time, being beyond its control, non- adjudication of appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.
7.
In the judgments cited above, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits.
8.
Aside above, reference may also be had to a Division Bench Judgment rendered by Punjab and Haryana High Court in case titled as Luxmi Traders versus Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.6, wherein based on elaborate discussion and deliberations thereof, following view has been taken.
“60. On the basis of discussions and deliberations aforesaid, we come to the following conclusions:- (i) Service of SCN upon the petitioner/assessee concerned cannot be deemed sufficient merely on account of its uploading on the Common Portal, unless its receipt is acknowledged or a reply is filed.
(ii) Where SCN is served only by way of uploading it on the Common Portal and in the absence of reply filed by the petitioner/assessee concerned, ex parte order is passed in orginal, the proceedings would stand restored to the stage of issuance of SCN and the petitioner would be at liberty to file reply to the SCN within a period of four weeks from today whereafter, the Department shall proceed further after affording required opportunity of hearing.
(iii) In cases where the order-in-original is passed after contest, and is served only by uploading it on the Common Portal, the pe- riod of limitation for filing of appeal would not be triggered, and the assessee aggrieved will have the right to file an appeal within a period of four weeks from today.
(iv) Where appeals filed against the order-in-original, which was served only by uploading it on the Common Portal are dismissed on the ground of limitation, the order of the Appellate Court shall be set aside and the appeal would stand restored to its original number, and would be heard and decided on merits.
(v) In cases where SCNs were served only on portal and ex parte adjudication order was passed for want of reply of assessee and 6 (2026:PHHC099329:DB) in CWP No. 27139/2025.
[2026:RJ-JP:33101-DB] (6 of 6) [CW-6055/2025] appeal against the said order was dismissed on the ground of delay, both adjudication order and order-in-appeal shall be set aside and proceedings will be restored at the stage of issuance of SCN and petitioner/assessee shall be at liberty to file reply to SCN within four weeks from today, whereafter, the department shall proceed further after affording due opportunity of hearing.” 9.
Having given our thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid view expressed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, we are in respectful agreement therewith and accordingly, see no reason why the benefit be not accorded to the petitioners herein.
10.
In the premise, following the consistent view as already taken by this Court, ibid, we allow the present writ petition to the extent of condoning the delay in filing of the appeal by the petitioners.
11.
Accordingly, the Appellate Authority shall now entertain the appeal of the petitioners and adjudicate the same on merits, provided the same is filed within 30 days of the instant order being uploaded on the website of this Court.
12.
All pending application(s) also stand disposed of.
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (ARUN MONGA),J 89/Ashwani-Tanisha