M/S Farhat Construction vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Farhat Construction, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 10.11.2022 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appellate), State Tax, Durg Division. This order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an adjudication order dated 28-29.01.2021, which confirmed a demand of Rs. 16,04,845/- (CGST Rs.8,02,423/- and SGST Rs.8,02,423/-) for short payment of GST for the assessment period April 2020 to July 2020. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, stating it was barred by 536 days. The petitioner contended that this calculation was incorrect due to the Supreme Court's order on the extension of limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic and that the delay should have been condoned.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's submission regarding the incorrect calculation of limitation by the Appellate Authority, in light of the Supreme Court's order in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, was not sustainable. Even after excluding the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 as directed by the Supreme Court, the filing of the appeal would not fall within the extended period of limitation. The Supreme Court's order provided for a 90-day limitation period from 01.03.2022, or the remaining balance period if longer. The Court noted that the appeal was filed significantly beyond this period. Furthermore, the Court distinguished the case from the precedents cited by the petitioner, particularly M/s. Shree Udyog, where the appeal was filed within the original limitation period, and the delay in filing the certified copy was condoned due to pandemic-related issues. In the present case, the limitation expired after the normalization of the pandemic situation. The Court also reiterated that the CGST Act, 2017, is a special law and a complete code in itself, with specific provisions for limitation (Section 107), and the general provisions of the Limitation Act are excluded. Therefore, there was no power to condone delay beyond the period prescribed in the Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in calculating the period of limitation for filing the appeal, considering the Supreme Court's order in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (2022 SCC OnLine SC 111)? Petitioner's argument: The Supreme Court's order dated 10.01.2022 directed the exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 for limitation purposes. Therefore, the Appellate Authority's calculation of a 536-day delay was incorrect, and the appeal should have been considered within the extended limitation period. They relied on the Supreme Court's order and decisions from the Orissa High Court (M/s. Shree Udyog) and Calcutta High Court (Kajal Dutta). Revenue's argument: The Supreme Court's order excluded the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, with a fresh limitation period starting from 01.03.2022. The appeal was filed more than 10 months after this date. Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, prescribes a limitation of three months, extendable by one month, and the Act is a special law that excludes the applicability of the Limitation Act. They relied on a Division Bench decision of the Chhattisgarh High Court in Nandan Steels And Power Limited.