Facts of the Case

M/S Firdous Metal Store filed a writ petition before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar, challenging an order passed against it under the Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and seeking interim relief pending the writ petition. Under Section 107 of the J&K GST Act, an appeal against such an order had to be filed within three months. The petitioner submitted that the impugned order was brought to its notice only in September 2023, by which time the three-month limitation period would already have elapsed, leaving the statutory appellate remedy effectively unavailable through no fault of the petitioner. The matter came up before a Division Bench of the Court on 01.12.2023 for consideration of the petitioner's prayer for interim relief, with the Advocate General for the Union Territory and the Deputy Solicitor General appearing for the respondents.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner could still avail the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the J&K GST Act, having become aware of the impugned order only after the three-month limitation period would ordinarily have run.
  2. Whether the High Court should grant interim relief directly or instead facilitate access to the appellate forum.
  3. Whether limitation could be relaxed for this petitioner without setting a general precedent.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned order came to the petitioner's notice only in September 2023, by which time the three-month period prescribed under Section 107 of the J&K GST Act for filing an appeal would have already lapsed.
  • As a result, the appellate authority would not entertain any appeal the petitioner might file, leaving the petitioner without an effective remedy unless the Court intervened.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The learned Advocate General, appearing for the Union of India and other respondents, submitted that, without treating it as a precedent, the appellate authority could be directed to entertain an appeal filed by the petitioner within two months, subject to fulfilment of all other necessary requirements except the limitation period, which stood waived to that extent.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court noted the statutory appellate remedy available under Section 107 of the J&K GST Act and accepted the Advocate General's fair concession that limitation could be waived for this petitioner without being treated as a general precedent.
  • The writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner approach the appellate authority to prefer an appeal, and that the appellate authority entertain such appeal, filed within two months, on fulfilment of all requirements except the limitation period, which was waived to that extent.
  • Liberty was reserved for the petitioner to avail further legal remedy against any order the appellate authority might pass.

Important Clarification

  • Where a GST assessee can show that the impugned order came to its notice only after the ordinary appeal limitation period under Section 107 would have expired, courts may secure a concession from the Department to waive limitation for that specific appeal, rather than adjudicating the underlying dispute themselves.
  • Such a waiver, expressly granted “without making it a precedent,” is case-specific and does not create a general rule extending the Section 107 limitation period for other assessees.
  • The Court's disposal, at the interim-relief stage itself, illustrates a pragmatic route to relief: rather than deciding whether limitation could be condoned as a matter of law, the Bench secured a workable concession from the Department and closed the writ petition on that basis.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, Jammu and Kashmir Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — prescribes the three-month limitation period (extendable by one month for sufficient cause) for filing a first appeal against an adverse order.
  • Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950 — writ jurisdiction invoked by the petitioner to seek interim relief and access to the appellate remedy.

Decision – In Favour of

This was a disposal with directions, not an adjudication of the underlying tax dispute. It is procedurally favourable to the Assessee, since the petitioner secured a case-specific waiver of the Section 107 limitation period and a two-month window to file its appeal, but the Court expressed no view on the merits of the impugned order itself, leaving that to be argued before the appellate authority.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar
  • Case No.: WP(C) 3134/2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice M. A. Chowdhary
  • Decision Date: 1 December 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of with directions (appeal timeline relaxed)

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.