M/S. Von Industries vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St)

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. VON INDUSTRIES, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 27.04.2024 for FY 2017-18. This court, by an order dated 25.04.2025, permitted the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within two weeks. However, the petitioner lodged the appeal on 22.08.2026, approximately 16 months after the court's order. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST), the first respondent, rejected the appeal via an order dated 01.09.2026, solely on the grounds of delay. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition seeking to quash the rejection order and to direct the Appellate Deputy Commissioner to entertain the appeal on merits.

Held

The Court held that the Appellate Deputy Commissioner was justified in rejecting the appeal on the grounds of delay. The Court noted that the petitioner failed to file the appeal within the two weeks granted by this Court's previous order, and instead filed it approximately 16 months later. The Court referred to Section 107 of the applicable GST enactments, which prescribes a limitation period of three months for filing an appeal, with a further condonation period of one month. Given that the appeal was presented significantly beyond the prescribed limitation period, the Court found no infirmity in the impugned order of rejection. The Court explicitly stated that it was leaving it open for the petitioner to assail the original assessment order in accordance with law. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Deputy Commissioner was justified in rejecting the petitioner's statutory appeal solely on the ground of delay, given the circumstances and the prior order of this Court? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 107 of the applicable GST enactments). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the appeal was rejected only on the ground of delay and sought another opportunity to present the appeal on merits. The petitioner relied on the prior order of this Court which permitted them to file the appeal. Respondents' contention: The respondents, represented by the learned Government Advocate (Taxes), did not explicitly argue on the merits of the delay but highlighted that the appeal was not lodged within the two-week period permitted by this Court and was submitted approximately 16 months late. They noted that the statutory limitation under Section 107 is three months, with a further one-month condonation period.