M/S Kissan Beej Kendra vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Held
The High Court held that the rejection of the petitioner's appeal by the Additional Commissioner, CGST Appeals, Panchkula, on the sole ground of not providing a self-certified copy of the order was incorrect. The Court opined that such an appeal should only be treated as defective, and the appellant ought to have been given an opportunity to remove the defect. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 25.10.2024, and directed the petitioner to file a self-certified copy of the order before the Appellate Authority within 15 days. Upon compliance, the appeal is to be restored and decided on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months. The ratio decidendi is that procedural defects should not lead to outright dismissal of an appeal without affording an opportunity to rectify them.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Kissan Beej Kendra, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging an order dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, CGST Appeals, Panchkula. The appeal filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority was rejected solely on the ground of failure to provide a self-certified copy of the order against which the appeal was preferred. The petitioner contended that this rejection was improper. The respondents, Union of India and others, accepted notice. The High Court noted that the appeal should have been treated as defective and an opportunity should have been given to the petitioner to rectify the defect.
Key Issues
1. Whether the dismissal of an appeal for failure to provide a self-certified copy of the order under challenge, without granting an opportunity to cure the defect, is legally sustainable? (Question of law). The petitioner argued that the rejection of the appeal on a procedural technicality, without allowing them to rectify the defect, was erroneous. They contended that the appeal should have been treated as defective and an opportunity to submit the required document should have been provided. The respondents, through their counsel, stated that if the petitioner submits a self-certified copy of the order, the appeal shall be decided on merits. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondents beyond this concession.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CWP-31911-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 123 CWP-31911-2024 Decided on : 27.11.2024 M/s Kissan Beej Kendra . . . Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Peyush Pruthi, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents No.1, 3 & 4 – UOI. Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana for respondent No.2. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
, J. (Oral)
Notice of motion.
Ms. Pridhi Sandhu, Sr. Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 3 & 4, while Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. 3. The only ground on which appeal of the petitioner was rejected was failure to provide the self certified copy of the order against which appeal was filed. In the opinion of this Court, such appeal can only be treated as defected and could not have been dismissed. Opportunity ought to have been given to the appellant (petitioner herein), to remove the defect. Learned counsel for the respondents are present and we appreciate their s
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.