Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Teeam Score (GSTIN 33AAHFT7031M1ZZ), challenged an order dated 27.03.2026 in Form GST APL-02 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (CT)(GST)(Appeals), Erode and Salem, under the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017, rejecting the petitioner's statutory appeal filed on 16.03.2026. Under Section 107, an appeal must ordinarily be filed within three months, with the Appellate Authority empowered to condone a further delay of up to one month. The petitioner's appeal fell within this condonable one-month window, but no formal application for condonation of delay had been filed alongside it, leading to its outright rejection.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an appeal falling within the condonable period under Section 107 can be rejected merely because a separate application for condonation of delay was not filed.
  2. What relief is appropriate where the omission is a bona fide procedural lapse rather than a substantive limitation bar.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The delay in filing the appeal was within the one-month condonable period under Section 107, and the failure to file a separate condonation application was an inadvertent error rather than any substantive defect.
  • The appeal deserved to be restored and considered on its merits rather than rejected on this technical ground.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Additional Government Pleader submitted that even if an opportunity were to be granted, the petitioner should be directed to file a formal application for condonation of delay before the appeal could be entertained.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted that the delay was admittedly within the condonable one-month period under Section 107 and that the appeal's rejection stemmed solely from the petitioner's inadvertent failure to file a formal condonation application, not from any assessment that the delay itself was unjustifiable.
  • Rather than remanding the petitioner to file a fresh condonation application, the Court itself condoned the delay considering its limited extent, set aside the impugned rejection order dated 27.03.2026, and directed that the appeal be treated as having the delay condoned, taken on file, and considered by the Appellate Authority on its own merits.
  • The appeal was directed to be disposed of in accordance with law, without costs.

Important Clarification

  • Where the delay in filing a GST appeal falls squarely within the one-month condonable period under Section 107, a bona fide procedural omission — such as failing to file a separate condonation application — should not result in outright rejection of the appeal.
  • Courts may condone such delay directly and restore the appeal for consideration on merits, rather than requiring the assessee to undertake a fresh, potentially repetitive condonation exercise before the Appellate Authority.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 – three-month limitation for filing first appeal, with a further one-month condonable period.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the assessee — the rejection order was set aside, the delay condoned, and the appeal restored for consideration on merits.

Case Details

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P(MD)No.9388 of 2026 with W.M.P(MD)Nos.7508 and 7509 of 2026; Coram: Hon'ble Mr Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy; Date: 06.04.2026.

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.