M/S Vedant Construction vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vedant Construction, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 23.12.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade II (Appeal), Commercial Tax Department, Jhansi. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an order dated 26.11.2018, which had cancelled the petitioner's GST registration. The dismissal was on the grounds of limitation, as the appeal was filed on 1.12.2021, beyond the prescribed period. The appellate authority noted that the limitation period to file the appeal, as per Section 107(4) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017, expired on 25.3.2019. The petitioner contended that the order dated 26.11.2018 was uploaded on the GST portal, and as per the Removal of Difficulties order dated 25.6.2020, service should be deemed from 31.8.2020. Furthermore, the petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's orders suspending limitation periods meant the appeal was filed within time.

Held

The Court held that the appeal filed by the petitioner was within the period of limitation. The reasoning was based on two key points. Firstly, in view of the Removal of Difficulties order dated 25.6.2020 and the fact that the order dated 26.11.2018 was uploaded on the common GST portal, the order would be deemed to have been served on the petitioner on 31.8.2020. Secondly, the limitation for filing the appeal was suspended by various orders of the Supreme Court until 28.2.2022. Consequently, the appeal filed by the petitioner on 1.12.2021 could not be considered time-barred. The Court found that the appellate authority had erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the grounds of limitation. The impugned order dated 23.12.2021 was quashed, and the matter was remitted back to the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits, treating it as having been filed within time. The ratio decidendi is that when statutory provisions, executive orders, and judicial pronouncements (like Supreme Court orders on limitation suspension) converge, they must be applied holistically to determine the timeliness of a filing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 26.11.2018 was within the period of limitation, considering the provisions of Section 107(4) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017, the Removal of Difficulties order dated 25.6.2020, and the Supreme Court's orders suspending limitation periods? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the order dated 26.11.2018 was uploaded on the common GST portal, and therefore, in terms of the Removal of Difficulties order dated 25.6.2020, the date of service should be considered 31.8.2020, with the limitation commencing from that date. They further contended that the Supreme Court's orders suspending the period of limitation until 28.2.2022 meant that their appeal, filed on 1.12.2021, was within the extended time. The petitioner also relied on this Court's judgment in Writ Tax No. 76 of 2022 (M/S J.K. Infratech vs. Additional Commissioner & Anr.). Respondent's arguments: The Standing Counsel for the respondent did not dispute that the issue was covered by the judgment in M/S J.K. Infratech.