Urmila Rcp Projects Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Urmila RCP Projects Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an appellate order dated 25.10.2022. This order rejected their appeal due to a delay of 23 days in filing. The original assessment order was dated 13.02.2021, issued under Section 73(1) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that they regularly filed returns and paid taxes, yet an assessment order was passed. They claimed to have obtained the order from the GST portal and filed the appeal on 23.07.2022, which was significantly delayed. The petitioner sought condonation of this delay. The appellate authority noted that the notice and assessment order were available on the common portal, which the petitioner failed to notice due to their own default.

Held

The Court held that the appellate authority correctly applied Section 107(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in rejecting the appeal due to the delay. The Court noted that the petitioner's failure to notice the assessment order, despite it being uploaded on the common portal as per Section 169, was due to their own default. The Court further observed that the appeal was filed on 07.10.2022, which was significantly beyond the extended limitation period granted by the Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 (saving limitation between 15.03.2020 and 20.02.2022, with a further three months from 01.03.2022). The Court reiterated the principle that statutory provisions for delay condonation cannot be extended by appellate authorities or the High Court under Article 226 when the prescribed period has elapsed. Therefore, the Court found no reason to interfere with the appellate order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority erred in rejecting the appeal on grounds of delay, considering the petitioner's submission that they were unaware of the assessment order due to its availability only on the GST portal and their subsequent failure to notice it, thereby raising a question of law regarding the interpretation and application of Section 107(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning the condonation of delay in filing appeals. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that they had obtained the order from the GST portal and filed the appeal, albeit with a significant delay, and sought condonation of this delay. They also raised concerns about not being given a reasonable opportunity for hearing. Respondent's arguments: The respondents, through the appellate order, relied on Section 107(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which prescribes a maximum period for filing delayed appeals with satisfactory explanation. They also pointed to Section 169 regarding service of notice via the common portal. The respondents further highlighted the Supreme Court's orders in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, which provided a period of saved limitation, and noted that the appeal was filed long after these extended periods.