Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Rajesh Bhandar, a proprietary concern from Munger, Bihar, represented by its proprietor Rajesh Kumar Bhagat, filed a Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case before the High Court of Judicature at Patna challenging an appellate order that had dismissed its appeal under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act) on the ground of delay. Section 107 of the BGST Act permits a three-month period for filing an appeal, extendable by one further month upon satisfactory explanation, and the petitioner's appeal, rejected vide Annexure-4, had been filed beyond even this extended one-month condonable period. While the matter was originally listed for 12.12.2023, the Court advanced the hearing in view of the intervening Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023, issued by the CBIC under Section 148 of the CGST Act, which introduced a special procedure allowing taxpayers whose appeals against Section 73/74 orders (passed on or before 31.03.2023) were rejected solely on limitation grounds to file appeals afresh by 31.01.2024, subject to specified pre-deposit conditions.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Appellate Authority or the High Court under Article 226 could condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 107 of the BGST Act beyond the one-month condonable period prescribed by the statute.
  2. Whether Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023 could be applied to restore and revive an appeal earlier dismissed solely on the ground of limitation.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The appeal under Section 107 of the BGST Act had been dismissed solely on the ground of delay, without consideration of the merits of the underlying tax dispute.
  • Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax, dated 02.11.2023, specifically extended the time for filing appeals against orders passed under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act on or before 31.03.2023, and this special procedure should be applied to restore the petitioner's appeal.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Ordinarily, where a statute prescribes a specific outer limit for condonable delay, neither the Appellate Authority nor the High Court under Article 226 can condone delay beyond that period, as settled by this Court and the Supreme Court.
  • The special procedure under Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax, being conditional on payment of admitted tax dues and a further 12.5% of the disputed tax (with at least 20% of that amount from the Electronic Cash Ledger), would govern any restoration of the appeal, subject to the petitioner satisfying those conditions.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court reiterated the settled position that a delayed appeal beyond the statutory condonable period under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act ordinarily cannot be condoned by either the Appellate Authority or the writ court.
  • However, the Court held that Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax, dated 02.11.2023, effectively extends the time for filing such appeals up to 31.01.2024 under a special procedure, and accordingly set aside the impugned order at Annexure-4, restoring the appeal subject to the petitioner satisfying the pre-deposit conditions in paragraph 3 of the Notification.
  • The Court clarified that the petitioner would need to remit the "deficient amount", since only 10% of the disputed tax (rather than the 12.5% + admitted dues required under the Notification) would typically have been remitted at the time of the original appeal.
  • Significantly, the Court extended this benefit generally, directing the Commissioner of State Taxes, Bihar to issue instructions enabling even those assessees whose writ petitions against delayed-appeal dismissals had earlier been rejected by the High Court to avail the Notification's benefit, subject to compliance with its conditions, and the writ petition was allowed on these terms.

Important Clarification

Although courts cannot ordinarily condone delay in filing a GST appeal beyond the statutory outer limit under Section 107(4), a subsequent CBIC notification such as Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax that prescribes a special procedure for filing time-barred appeals effectively supersedes the rigidity of the limitation bar, and applies even to appeals earlier dismissed by courts on the ground of delay, provided the pre-deposit and other conditions of the notification are fulfilled.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – limitation for filing appeals before the Appellate Authority.
  • Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act, 2017 – determination of tax not paid, short paid, or erroneously refunded.
  • Section 148 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023 – special procedure for filing appeals against orders rejected solely on limitation grounds.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision favours the Assessee. The Patna High Court set aside the order dismissing the appeal as time-barred and restored it for consideration on merits, applying Notification No.53/2023-Central Tax, though the restoration remains conditional on the petitioner complying with the pre-deposit requirements prescribed in the Notification.

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.9136 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy
  • Decision Date: 09 November 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Writ petition 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.