M/S Theme Engineering Services Private Limited (2018-2019) vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Theme Engineering Services Private Limited, filed two writ petitions challenging orders of the Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal) that dismissed their appeals on grounds of delay. The appeals were filed under the Bihar Goods and Services Taxes Act, 2017 (BGST Act). The delay in filing the appeals exceeded the three-month period allowed by Section 107 of the BGST Act, and also the further one-month period for filing with a satisfactory explanation. The petitioner's appeals were rejected by the first Appellate Authority. Subsequently, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs issued Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax, dated 02.11.2023, extending the time for filing appeals against orders passed under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act on or before 31.03.2023.

Held

The Court held that while generally, delays beyond the statutory period prescribed in Section 107 of the BGST Act cannot be condoned by the Appellate Authority or the High Court under Article 226, Notification No. 53 of 2023 provides a special procedure for filing delayed appeals against orders under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act. The Court found that the petitioner's appeals, which were dismissed for delay, could be restored to the file of the Appellate Authority subject to the conditions stipulated in paragraph 3 of the Notification being satisfied. These conditions include paying the admitted portion of tax, interest, fine, fee, and penalty, and 12.5% of the remaining disputed tax amount (with specific debiting from the Electronic Cash Ledger), by the stipulated deadline of 31.01.2024. The Court set aside the impugned orders and directed the assessee to comply with these conditions. The ratio is that a special notification extending time for filing appeals, with specific conditions, can be invoked even for appeals previously dismissed for delay, provided the conditions are met.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, can condone delays in filing appeals beyond the period prescribed in Section 107 of the BGST Act, especially when the statute provides a specific extended period for delayed appeals? 2. Whether Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax, which extends the time for filing appeals against orders under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act, can be applied to the petitioner's cases where appeals were dismissed for delay? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner implicitly argues that the benefit of Notification No. 53 of 2023 should be extended to them, allowing their delayed appeals to be considered on merits, as the notification provides a special procedure for such cases. They rely on the High Court's power to grant relief under Article 226. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, represented by the State, likely argued that the appeals were correctly dismissed as they were filed beyond the statutory period prescribed under Section 107 of the BGST Act, and the High Court cannot override statutory limitations. They would have pointed to previous judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court stating that delays beyond the prescribed period cannot be condoned.