Shree Azad Transport Company Private LTD. vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Shree Azad Transport Company Private Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of its appeal under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The appeal was dismissed for being filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The petitioner contended that it attempted to file the appeal online within the stipulated period but encountered a technical glitch. On March 4, 2023, the petitioner informed the 1st Appellate Authority via email about the technical issue and also sent a hard copy through courier. The appeal was eventually uploaded on March 10, 2023, after the time for filing with delay condonation had elapsed. The order impugned in the appeal was dated November 6, 2022.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's actions demonstrated due alacrity in attempting to file the appeal online and subsequently notifying the authorities about the technical glitch. The Court found merit in the petitioner's contention that a technical issue prevented timely online filing. The Court also noted that the petitioner had sent a hard copy via courier, indicating an effort to comply with the filing requirements. Consequently, the Court found that the petitioner's situation warranted invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to provide an equitable remedy. The Court set aside the order of dismissal and directed the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal on its merits after issuing due notice and providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The appeal was restored to the file of the 1st Appellate Authority.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's appeal, filed beyond the statutory period for filing with delay condonation under Section 107 of the BGST Act, should be considered on merits, given the alleged technical glitch in online filing? The petitioner argued that it made a bona fide attempt to file the appeal online within the permissible time frame. It further contended that it promptly notified the authorities about the technical difficulties and sent a hard copy via courier, demonstrating due diligence. The petitioner relied on the principle of equity and the availability of remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek consideration of its appeal on merits. The respondent (State) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the petitioner's contentions.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 107(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 25-07-2024 The petitioner is aggrieved with dismissal of appeal filed under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(‘BGST Act’ for short) for reason of delay.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that within the time provided under the BGST Act for filing an application with delay condonation, the petitioner had 2/4 attempted to file an appeal which had to be filed online. However, since there was a technical glitch the appeal was not uploaded. The petitioner informed the same to the 1st Appellate Authority by email communication dated 04.03.2023 and on the very same day a hard copy was also sent through courier service, the invoices issued of which is produced as Annexure-3 series. The petitioner then uploaded the appeal on 10.03.2023 when the time admittedly had elapsed.
Section 107 of the BGST Act 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. Here, the order impugned in the appeal was dated 06.11.2022. An appeal was to be filed on or before 05.02.2023 and if necessary with a delay condonation application within one month thereafter i.e. 05.03.2023. 4. We see from Annexure-3 that the petitioner had addressed an email pointing out a technical glitch in the uploading of the appeal on 04.03.2023 itself. In fact the assessment order produced as Annexure-2 was dated 3/4 06.11.2022 and the petitioner had to file an appeal within 05.02.2023 or within 05.03.2023, when the petitioner could have filed an appeal under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act with a delay condonation application. The petitioner could eventually file an appeal only on 10.03.2023 which was dismissed as per Annexure-5. 5. We see that the petitioner had attempted to file an online appeal, which is evidenced by the email addressed to the 1st Appellate Authority, produced at Annexure-3 series. The petitioner had also with due alacrity; finding the technical glitch to have disabled the filing of the appeal, filed a hard copy through courier. It is also the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that though the 1st Appellate Authority’s Office was approached with a hard copy, it was not accepted, in which circumstance the courier had been sent.
We find the contentions to be one which would enable invoking the juri iction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and giving the equitable remedy of the petitioner’s appeal being considered on merits.
We hence set aside Annexure-5 order and direct 4/4 the Appellate Authority to consider the appeal on merits after issuing due notice to the petitioner and also giving him an opportunity of hearing. The appeal shall stand restored to the files of the 1st Appellate Authority.
The writ petition stands allowed.
ranjan/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 29.07.2024 Transmission Date NA
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.