Facts of the Case

M/s Prince Sanitation, a proprietorship of Prashant Kumar located at Saharsa, Bihar, filed CWJC No. 17202 of 2023 before the Patna High Court challenging an appellate order that rejected its appeal solely on the ground of a five-day delay in filing, under Section 107(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which prescribes a three-month limitation extendable by one further month. The order under challenge in the rejected appeal had been passed by the proper officer/Assessing Officer on 27.04.2023. The matter was heard on 07.12.2023 by the Chief Justice and Justice Rajiv Roy.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ court had power to condone the five-day delay in filing the GST appeal beyond the period prescribed under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act.
  2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023, issued under Section 148 of the CGST Act, given that the underlying order (27.04.2023) fell after the notification's cut-off date of 31.03.2023.
  3. Whether the 31.03.2023 cut-off fixed in the notification bore any rational nexus to its object, so as to justify extending its benefit to orders passed shortly thereafter.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The delay of only five days in filing the appeal was minor, yet the Appellate Authority rejected the appeal solely on that technical ground, without regard to the merits.
  • The petitioner should be permitted to avail the benefit of CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax, which offers an amnesty for taxpayers whose appeals were time-barred or rejected on limitation grounds, on payment of the prescribed pre-deposit.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The order does not record any distinct submission by the State opposing relief; the Bench's own analysis of Section 107(4) and the notification's cut-off date framed the central controversy without a recorded rebuttal from the State.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court held that neither the Appellate Authority nor a constitutional court under Article 226 has power to extend the specific limitation period prescribed under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act for filing a delayed appeal.
  • Examining Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax, the Court noted it permits appeals against orders passed by the proper officer on or before 31.03.2023 where the appeal was not filed in time or a delayed appeal was rejected; the petitioner's underlying order, dated 27.04.2023, fell just outside this cut-off.
  • The Court found no rationale for the 31.03.2023 cut-off, observing that since the notification itself was issued only on 02.11.2023, any order passed within at least the three months preceding that date ought to have been considered for the same beneficial treatment.
  • Accordingly, the Court allowed the petitioner to comply with the conditions of Notification No. 53/2023 (including the prescribed pre-deposit), upon which the appellate rejection order would stand set aside and the appeal would receive fresh consideration by the Appellate Authority; if the petitioner failed to fulfil the notification's conditions, the original rejection order would continue to operate.
  • The writ petition was allowed with these directions.

Important Clarification

  • A cut-off date fixed in a GST amnesty notification issued under Section 148 of the CGST Act is not immune from judicial scrutiny where it lacks a rational nexus to the notification's underlying object, particularly when the order impugned falls only marginally outside the cut-off and well within the period the notification itself contemplates as reasonable.
  • Courts may extend the practical benefit of such an amnesty notification to similarly placed taxpayers even where they do not strictly fall within its literal terms, by directing compliance with its substantive conditions (such as pre-deposit) as a precondition for relief.
  • The underlying limitation period under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act itself remains rigid and beyond the power of any authority, including a writ court, to relax; relief in such cases flows only through a specifically framed amnesty mechanism.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – prescribes the outer limit (three months plus one further month) for filing a GST appeal.
  • Section 148 of the CGST Act, 2017 – the enabling provision for special procedures such as the amnesty scheme under Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax.
  • CBIC Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023 – provides a special procedure for filing appeals against orders passed on or before 31.03.2023, on payment of a prescribed pre-deposit.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was allowed and the effective benefit of the amnesty notification was extended to the petitioner despite the literal cut-off date — a result substantially in favour of the Assessee, though relief remains conditional on the petitioner actually complying with the notification's pre-deposit and procedural requirements.

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. 17202 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy
  • Decision Date: 07.12.2023
  • Disposal Nature: Allowed; appellate rejection of delayed GST appeal set aside on compliance with amnesty conditions, petitioner permitted to avail Notification 53/2023 amnesty scheme

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.