Facts of the Case

Rajeev Agarwal's appeal against an order dated 07.03.2024 passed under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was dismissed by the appellate authority on 05.08.2025 on the ground of delay. The petitioner explained the delay by citing the death of a close family member, the subsequent departure of the accountant who handled his GST affairs, and the time taken to engage a fresh accountant and then an advocate before the appeal could be readied. Since no GST Appellate Tribunal exists to hear a further challenge, the petitioner approached the Calcutta High Court under its writ jurisdiction against the limitation-based dismissal.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the explanation offered for delay in filing the statutory appeal against a Section 73 order was sufficient to warrant condonation.
  2. Whether, in the absence of a functional Appellate Tribunal, the writ court should intervene to prevent the petitioner from being rendered remediless despite an unsatisfactory explanation for delay.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner explained that his inability to timely file the appeal arose from a bereavement in the family, the resignation of the accountant handling his GST compliance, and the consequent delay in locating the order and engaging fresh professional help.
  • It was submitted that since no Tribunal exists to hear a second appeal, dismissing the writ petition would leave the petitioner without any remedy at all.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State, represented by counsel for the Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, defended the appellate authority's dismissal on the ground of delay.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court observed that the explanation for delay, while offered, did not appear fully satisfactory.
  • However, having regard to the absence of a functional Tribunal and the risk of the petitioner being rendered remediless, the Court allowed one more opportunity to contest the appeal on terms.
  • It was directed that if the petitioner pays Rs. 10,000 to the High Court Legal Services Committee within three weeks and furnishes proof of payment before the appellate authority, the delay would stand condoned and the appeal heard on merits, rendering the impugned dismissal order of no effect.
  • If the petitioner fails to make the payment, the dismissal order remains effective and the writ petition would not enure to his benefit.

Important Clarification

  • Even where the reasons for delay in a GST appeal are not wholly convincing, courts may still condone delay by putting the assessee on terms — typically a cost payable to a Legal Services Committee — particularly where the statutory second-appeal forum (GSTAT) remains non-functional and dismissal would leave the assessee without any remedy.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – the original demand order under challenge in appeal.
  • Section 107, West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – first appeal to the appellate authority, including limitation for filing.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with a conditional opportunity; in favour of the Assessee, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000 to the High Court Legal Services Committee within three weeks.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court at Calcutta, Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side)
  • Case No.: WPA 21325 of 2025
  • Coram: Justice Om Narayan Rai
  • Date of Order: 19.11.2025

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.