Abbs Stones And Crushers Through Its Partner Brijendra Bahadur Singh vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court held that the issue of the power to condone delay in filing appeals under the GST Act had already been settled by a Division Bench of the same High Court in the case of Nandan Steels and Power Limited v. State of Chhattisgarh. The Court noted that Section 107 of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, provides a specific time limit for filing appeals and a further period of one month for presenting the appeal if sufficient cause is shown. The Court observed that the legislative intent was not to apply the Limitation Act, as evidenced by the specific provisions for condoning delay within the Act itself, and the High Court's power to entertain appeals after the limitation period under Section 117(2) if sufficient cause is shown. Since the petitioner could not differentiate their case from the Nandan Steels and Power Limited judgment, and their appeal was filed after approximately 611 days, the Court found that the appellate authority had rightly dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay. The Court also stated that no benefit could be granted to the petitioner based on the Calcutta High Court judgment cited, in view of the binding precedent of the Nandan Steels case. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Abbs Stones And Crushers, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated February 5, 2024, by the Joint Commissioner (Appeal), State Tax/Central and State Goods and Service Taxes, Durg Division. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal on the grounds of delay. The petitioner, a registered firm, failed to submit GST returns for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A show-cause notice was issued on December 2, 2021. Due to ill health and the pandemic, the petitioner could not reply or appear, leading to the cancellation of their GST registration on January 25, 2022. The petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority on December 27, 2023, along with an affidavit explaining the delay. The appellate authority dismissed this appeal due to the significant delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the ground of delay, considering the explanation provided for the delay due to COVID-19 and ill health? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated by dismissing the appeal without deciding it on merits? The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed in violation of natural justice and that the appeal should have been decided on its merits. They contended that the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently explained by their suffering from COVID-19 and that a liberal approach should have been taken for condoning the delay. They relied on the Calcutta High Court judgment in S. K. Chakraborty & Sons v. Union of India and Ors. The respondent State argued that the Limitation Act is not applicable as Section 107 of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, provides the limitation period for filing appeals. They further contended that the Act limits the entertainment of appeals after 180 days from the order's communication. The State cited a Division Bench judgment of the same High Court in Nandan Steels and Power Limited v. State of Chhattisgarh, which they argued was squarely applicable.