M/S. Bharath Motors vs. The State Tax Officer (Data-3)

Held

The Court held that the petitioner had demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay of 14 days in filing the appeal before the second respondent. The Court reasoned that the delay occurred solely because the petitioner was unable to access the web portal, which prevented them from timely filing their appeal. Consequently, the Court condoned the delay of 14 days. The order of the appellate authority (second respondent) rejecting the appeal due to the delay was set aside. The Court directed the second respondent to take up the appeal and dispose of it on its merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court explicitly left no issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Bharath Motors, engaged in the sale of two-wheeler motorcycles and spare parts, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte assessment order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the first respondent, the State Tax Officer, for the assessment year 2022-23, under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was unaware of the assessment proceedings due to reliance on a part-time accountant and lack of GST knowledge and portal access. Upon learning of recovery proceedings, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), which was rejected due to a delay of 14 days. The petitioner's grievance was that the delay was caused by an inability to access the web portal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has demonstrated sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay of 14 days in filing the appeal before the second respondent, as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the TNGST Act, 2017, thereby warranting condonation of delay? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was solely attributable to their inability to access the web portal, which prevented them from being aware of the assessment proceedings and filing the appeal within the stipulated time. They sought condonation of the 14-day delay. Respondents' contention: The learned Government Advocate for the respondents fairly submitted that if the Court finds sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay, appropriate orders may be passed, indicating no strong opposition to the condonation of delay if reasonable cause is established.