Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s PAM-G Enterprises, a proprietorship concern in Patna, was aggrieved by an assessment order dated 20.11.2021 passed under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. No statutory appeal was filed within the three-month period under Section 107(4), nor within the further condonable one-month period. The petitioner claimed it learnt of the order only after its bank account was closed by the Sales Tax Authority in March 2023, but the present writ petition, filed before the High Court of Judicature at Patna, itself came almost three years after the original order and several months after the petitioner claimed to have learnt of it.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ court could condone the petitioner's failure to file any statutory appeal against the order dated 20.11.2021, given the extraordinary delay.
  2. Whether Article 226 could be invoked as a substitute remedy after the time for filing a statutory appeal, including the condonable period, had long expired.
  3. Whether the benefit of CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax was available to allow a fresh appeal despite the delay.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner's bank account was closed by the Sales Tax Authority, and it was only then that the petitioner realised a demand had been raised against it under the auto-populated assessment order.
  • Since the petitioner became aware of the order only in March 2023, the delay in approaching the appellate/writ forum ought to be viewed sympathetically.
  • In the alternative, the petitioner sought the benefit of CBIC Notification No. 53/2023 to file a fresh appeal against the 20.11.2021 order.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State respondents, including the State Tax Commissioner and State Tax Assistant Commissioner, contended that the assessment order was validly passed and that it was the dealer's own responsibility to periodically verify the GST portal for auto-populated orders.
  • No specific date of closure of the bank account, or of the petitioner's actual knowledge, had even been pleaded, undermining the claim of a justifiable delay.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court held that an assessment order is auto-populated on the portal and it is the dealer's own responsibility to verify it periodically; the petitioner had not stated the date of closure of its account or of acquiring knowledge of the order, and even accepting its case, there was still a delay of more than eight months in filing the writ.
  • Reiterating that Article 226 is not a remedy that can be availed after the time for filing a statutory appeal has expired, the Court found no ground to entertain the writ petition on the delay-condonation plea.
  • However, applying CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax, which extends the appeal window for Section 73/74 orders passed on or before 31.03.2023 up to 31.01.2024 subject to enhanced pre-deposit conditions, the Court permitted the petitioner to file a fresh appeal against the order dated 20.11.2021, satisfying paragraph 3 of the Notification before the notified deadline, whereupon it would be considered on merits.
  • The writ petition was allowed only to this limited extent, on the conditions of the Notification.

Important Clarification

A writ court will not excuse an assessee's failure to file a timely GST appeal merely on the ground that it did not monitor the online portal, since orders are auto-populated and it is the dealer's responsibility to check periodically; Article 226 cannot be used to revive a remedy lost by delay. Nevertheless, where a government amnesty notification independently opens a fresh appeal window for orders of a specified vintage, an assessee can still avail that statutory dispensation on its own terms, even after being denied relief on the ordinary delay-condonation plea.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — prescribes the limitation for filing an appeal and the further condonable period.
  • CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023 — special one-time procedure for filing appeals against Section 73/74 orders passed on or before 31.03.2023, up to 31.01.2024, subject to pre-deposit conditions.

Decision – In Favour of

The outcome is mixed but ultimately, in part, in favour of the Assessee. The Court firmly rejected the plea for condonation of the extraordinary delay in invoking Article 226 and endorsed the Department's position on that count, but it separately allowed the petitioner the benefit of the amnesty Notification No. 53/2023 to file a fresh appeal on satisfying its pre-deposit conditions, so the door to a merits hearing was kept open through that statutory route alone.

Related Case Laws

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

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Judicature at Patna
  • Case No.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14482 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Honourable the Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
  • Decision Date: 2023-11-29
  • Disposal Nature: Allowed

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.