M/S Vikash Int Udyog vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vikash Int Udyog, filed a writ petition challenging an appellate order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner, State Taxes (Appeal), Saran Division. This appellate order rejected the petitioner's appeal against an assessment order dated 28.12.2022. The rejection was solely on the grounds of the appeal being filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The assessment order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Taxes, Siwan Circle. The petitioner's appeal was filed on 04.09.2023, approximately four months after the expiry of the extended limitation period.

Held

The Court held that it would not invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The reasoning was that the petitioner had an alternate statutory remedy available in the form of an appeal, which they failed to pursue diligently within the stipulated time. The appellate order correctly noted that Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, allows for an appeal within three months, with a further one-month period for condonation of delay upon satisfactory reasons. The petitioner's appeal was filed on 04.09.2023, well after the expiry of the extended limitation period which ended on 27.04.2023. The Court emphasized that the law favors the diligent and not the indolent, and the delay was against the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. No specific issue was left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to entertain a writ petition when the appeal was rejected by the appellate authority on the ground of delay, and the petitioner had not been diligent in availing the statutory remedy? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought to challenge the appellate order that dismissed their appeal due to delay. The specific arguments made by the petitioner are not explicitly detailed in the judgment beyond the fact that they are challenging the rejection of their appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the State of Bihar and its tax authorities, contended that the appeal was filed significantly beyond the statutory period prescribed under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and therefore, the appellate authority rightly rejected it. The judgment implies the revenue would have argued for upholding the appellate order.