M/S Bansal Surinder And Co. Through Proprietor Deepak Bansal vs. Commissioner, Department Of Trade And Taxes/GST (State) & Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Bansal Surinder & Co., through its proprietor Deepak Bansal, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 28, 2021, which cancelled its GST registration. The petitioner also challenged a subsequent order dated September 9, 2022, passed by the learned Special Commissioner, which rejected its appeal against the cancellation order. The Special Commissioner rejected the appeal not on merits but on the grounds of limitation, as it was filed beyond the prescribed three-month period from the date of the cancellation order. The petitioner contended that the delay was due to mitigating factors, including the Covid-19 pandemic, and that the Supreme Court's suo moto orders extending limitation in all matters should have been considered. The respondent contested the appeal solely on the ground of limitation.

Held

The High Court held that given the mitigating factors and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it was appropriate to set aside the order dated September 9, 2022, passed by the learned Special Commissioner. The Court found that the Special Commissioner's rejection of the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, without considering the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and the Supreme Court's suo moto orders on limitation, was not justified. The Court reasoned that these factors warranted condonation of the delay. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the learned Special Commissioner to be decided on its merits. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original GST registration cancellation order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the learned Special Commissioner erred in rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the ground of limitation, considering the mitigating factors such as the Covid-19 pandemic and the Supreme Court's suo moto orders extending limitation in all matters? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on principles of limitation and condonation of delay). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal before the Special Commissioner was attributable to mitigating circumstances, specifically the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. They further contended that the Supreme Court, in its suo moto Writ Petition No. 3/2020, had issued orders extending the limitation period for all matters, which should have been applied to their case. Therefore, the appeal ought to have been considered on its merits. Revenue's Arguments: The respondent (Department of Trade and Taxes/GST) stated that they were contesting the present appeal solely on the ground that the petitioner's appeal before the learned Special Commissioner was barred by limitation.