Anil Kumar vs. The Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal)

Facts

The petitioner, Anil Kumar, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal) on 29.04.2025. This order was passed in response to the petitioner's appeal against an order dated 16.12.2024 by the State Tax Officer - 4 (Ins.). The petitioner's appeal before the first respondent (Deputy Commissioner) was filed with a delay of 35 days. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and direct the first respondent to consider his appeal on merits after granting due opportunity, acknowledging the delay in filing.

Held

The Court quashed the impugned order passed by the first respondent. The Court directed the first respondent to condone the delay of 35 days in filing the appeal. The first respondent was further directed to entertain the petitioner's appeal and dispose of it on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The Court adopted the same approach as in a previous case (W.P.(MD)No.22289 of 2025), where marginal delays were condoned to allow appeals to be heard on merits. The ratio decidendi is that marginal delays in filing statutory appeals, especially in tax matters, should be condoned to ensure that appeals are decided on their merits, promoting natural justice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay of 35 days in filing the appeal before the first respondent is condonable, considering it was beyond the condonable period of limitation? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the delay was marginal and that the Court should show indulgence, citing a previous order in W.P.(MD)No.22289 of 2025 (Tvl. Jashwin Auto Services Vs. The State Tax Officer - (Inspection- 3)). Respondents' Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents regarding the delay or the merits of the appeal. The focus was on the Court's approach to marginal delays.