M/S Ankit Motors vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the Supreme Court's order regarding the extension of limitation. The Supreme Court's direction provided for a limitation period of 90 days from March 1, 2022, or a longer period if the remaining balance of limitation was greater than 90 days. The Court found that the appellate authority had not considered the second part of this direction. Furthermore, the Court noted that the Appellate Authority has the power under Section 107(4) of the GST Act to condone delay for a further period of 30 days on sufficient cause. Since these aspects were not considered by the appellate authority, the order dated August 25, 2022, was set aside. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned in view of the Supreme Court's directions. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority for a decision on the appeal on merits.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ankit Motors, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated August 25, 2022, passed by the appellate authority. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an order dated October 27, 2021, on the grounds that it was barred by limitation under Section 107 of the GST Act. The petitioner had filed their appeal on June 30, 2022. The present writ petition was entertained because no GST Tribunal had been constituted in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner argued that they were entitled to an extension of limitation based on an order from the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of extension of limitation as per the Supreme Court's order in Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition No. 03 of 2020, considering the period of limitation for filing the appeal against the order dated October 27, 2021. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court's order granted a limitation period of 90 days from March 1, 2022, or the actual balance period of limitation remaining if it was longer than 90 days. They argued that the appellate authority failed to consider the second part of the Supreme Court's direction regarding the longer period. The petitioner also submitted that the Appellate Authority has the power under Section 107(4) of the GST Act to extend the limitation by another 30 days for sufficient cause, which was not considered. Revenue's Argument: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent State.