M/S Palco Infr vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax And Revenue, Medinipur Charge And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Palco Infr, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated August 14, 2025, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017. This appellate order had dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an order dated December 11, 2023, passed under Section 73 of the same Act. The appeal was dismissed solely on the grounds of being filed beyond the statutory limitation period. The petitioner contended that the order under appeal was uploaded on the GST portal under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab, which caused them to miss noticing it. The petitioner argued that dismissing the appeal would result in the loss of an avenue for redressal.
Held
The Court held that considering the facts and circumstances, and the potential loss of an appeal avenue for the petitioner, it was deemed fit to grant one opportunity for the appeal to be heard and decided on merits. The Court condoned the delay on the condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs. 10,000/- with the State Legal Services Authority within three weeks from the date of the order and furnishes proof of payment to the appellate authority. Upon fulfillment of these conditions, the appellate authority was directed to proceed with hearing the appeal on merits, and the impugned order dated August 14, 2025, would have no effect. The issue of the merits of the original appeal under Section 73 was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority, occasioned by the order being uploaded under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab on the GST portal, should be condoned? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the delay was unintentional and due to the specific manner of uploading the order, which led them to miss it. They contended that condoning the delay would allow them to pursue their appeal on merits, preventing the loss of a statutory remedy. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State respondents regarding the delay or the merits of the case. The appellate authority's order, which was under challenge, had dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
N.22Sl 151/CL 12.11.25 Sl-26 Ct.551 (S.R.)
WPA 20954 of 2025 M/s. Palco Infr v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Revenue, Medinipur Charge & Ors. Mr. Sandip Choraria Mr. Akash Chakrabroty Mr. Rishav Manna … for the petitioner. Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty Mr. S. Shaw Mr. Saptak Sanyal … for the State respondents.
Affidavit of service as filed today on behalf of the writ petitioner is taken on record.
This writ petition has been filed assailing an order dated August 14, 2025 passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017 thereby dismissing the petitioner’s appeal against an order dated December 11, 2023 passed under Section 73 of the said Act of 2017. The petitioner’s appeal has been dismissed on the ground of the same having been filed beyond the statutory period of limitation.
The petitioner has sought to explain the delay occasioned by it in preferring the appeal before the appellate authority by submitting that the relevant order that was assailed in appeal had been uploaded on the GST portal under the tab “Additional Notices and Orders” and, as such, the petitioner missed to notice the same.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner would be losing an avenue of appeal if the delay is not condoned, this Court deems it fit to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to get its appeal heard and decided on merits, upon putting the petitioner on terms. If the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the State Legal Services Authority within a period of three weeks from date and furnishes proof of such payment before the appellate authority, then the delay shall stand condoned and the appellate authority shall proceed to hear the appeal on merits. In such case the order dated August 14, 2025 impugned herein shall have no effect.
WPA 20954 of 2025 stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied as expeditiously as possible. (Om Narayan Rai, J.) 2
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.