M/S Lexorbis Consulting PVT LTD vs. Special Commissioner I Department Of Trade And Taxes Appellate Authority Zone Ii & Ors.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s Lexorbis Consulting Pvt Ltd, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 11.08.2026 passed by the Special Commissioner-I (Appellate Authority) dismissing their appeal. The appeal was filed against a demand order dated 21.12.2023 passed by the GST Officer/Proper Officer. The Petitioner contended that the Order-in-Original was never served upon them, and therefore, the limitation period for filing the appeal should commence from the date they became aware of it, which was 17.06.2026, while processing a refund application. The Petitioner sought quashing of the Appellate Authority's order, the demand order, and directions for fresh adjudication, as well as a declaration that certain notifications were ultra vires. The Respondents did not dispute the applicability of the principle laid down in the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment in Luxmi Traders.

Held

The Court held that since there was no dispute from the Respondents regarding the applicability of the principle laid down in the Punjab and Haryana High Court's judgment in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh & Ors., the order-in-appeal dated 11.08.2026 passed by the Appellate Authority is set aside. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the Petitioner's appeal on merits, in accordance with the law. The issue regarding the validity and correctness of Notifications No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 09/2023-State Tax dated 22.06.2023 was noted as pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and the parties were to remain bound by the ultimate judgment of the Supreme Court. The Court did not decide the merits of the notifications in this order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the period of limitation for filing an appeal against an Order-in-Original, which was allegedly not served upon the petitioner, should commence from the date of the order or the date of its knowledge by the petitioner, as per Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that the Order-in-Original was never served and thus the limitation period for filing the appeal should be calculated from the date of knowledge (17.06.2026), not the date of the order. They relied on the judgment in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh & Ors. to support their contention that the Appellate Authority erred in computing the limitation period. Respondents' Arguments: The Respondents, through their counsel, agreed with the principle laid down in Luxmi Traders and suggested that the Appellate Authority may be directed to hear the appeal on merits, referencing paragraph 60(iv) of the said judgment.