Facts of the Case

JBR Constructions Private Limited, a company engaged in providing works contract services, was issued letters by the revenue seeking explanation for discrepancies in GST payment for the period July 2017 to March 2020. After the petitioner replied, the 4th respondent (Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Ananthapur GST Division) issued a show cause notice proposing a demand of Rs. 1,33,19,137/- along with interest and penalty, and despite the petitioner's detailed reply, passed Order-in-Original No. 09/2022 dated 19.10.2022. The petitioner did not challenge the order on merits but sought condonation of a 65-day delay, beyond the three-month period plus the one-month condonable period under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, in filing an appeal before the Appellate Additional Commissioner (GST), Guntur, citing that he suffered from uncontrollable diabetes and pneumonia for six months.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the High Court, in writ jurisdiction, can condone a delay in filing a GST appeal that exceeds the maximum condonable period prescribed under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner suffered from acute, uncontrollable diabetes and pneumonia for six months, preventing timely filing of the appeal.
  • The GST web portal does not permit filing of appeals after the statutory condonable period expires.
  • The petitioner has a good case on merits and a huge amount of tax is involved, warranting an opportunity to be heard by the Appellate Authority.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC did not oppose condonation outright but submitted that if the Court was inclined to allow the writ petition, suitable terms should be imposed.

Court Order / Findings

  • The petitioner had not challenged the correctness of the order-in-original but only sought indulgence to condone the delay in filing the appeal.
  • Section 107 permits filing within three months, extendable by one month on sufficient cause; the present delay of 65 days fell beyond even this condonable period, ordinarily barring the Appellate Authority from entertaining it.
  • Given the petitioner's documented ill-health and the substantial tax amount involved, the Court held it was in the interest of justice to condone the delay and permit the appeal, notwithstanding the statutory bar, subject to conditions.
  • The petitioner was directed to file the appeal within one week, subject to depositing 20% of the disputed tax.

Important Clarification

  • Though Section 107 of the CGST Act ordinarily bars any appeal filed beyond the three-month plus one-month condonable period, a writ court can, in exceptional circumstances such as documented serious illness and a large tax demand, exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to permit a belated appeal, typically conditioned on a pre-deposit higher than the standard 10%.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, CGST Act, 2017 - prescribes the limitation period (three months, extendable by one month for sufficient cause) for filing an appeal against an adjudication order.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was allowed in favour of the Assessee, with the Court exercising its writ jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the appeal, subject to a 20% pre-deposit condition, without adjudicating the merits of the underlying tax demand.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati
Case No.: W.P.No. 11546 of 2023
Coram: Justice U. Durga Prasad Rao and Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
Date of Order: 07.08.2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.