Appeal Can't Be Dismissed Due To Procedural Delay When Assessee Has Complied With Statutory Requirements Including Pre-Deposit: Madras HC
Mehak Dhiman
24 Feb 2025 12:35 PM
The Madras High Court stated that appeal can't be dismissed due to procedural delay, when assessee has complied statutory requirements including pre-deposit. “The appeal should not be dismissed merely due to a procedural delay, especially when the petitioner has made an effort to comply with the statutory requirements, including the pre-deposit of 10% of the tax...
The Madras High Court stated that appeal can't be dismissed due to procedural delay, when assessee has complied statutory requirements including pre-deposit.
“The appeal should not be dismissed merely due to a procedural delay, especially when the petitioner has made an effort to comply with the statutory requirements, including the pre-deposit of 10% of the tax liability and additional payments towards the disputed tax amount” stated the bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh.
In this case, the notice was uploaded in the additional notices' column of the common portal and the consultant engaged by the assessee/petitioner was unaware of the proceedings initiated by the State Tax Officer/first respondent.
As a result, the assessee was unable to submit a timely reply. The assessee became aware of the impugned order only on 16.11.2024, when its bank account, maintained with the bank, was attached by the State Tax Officer in recovery proceedings under Section 79 of the GST Act, 2017.
Thereafter, the assessee filed an appeal on 20.11.2024, along with a petition for condonation of the delay of 35 days. A pre-deposit under Section 107(6) of the Act was also made, amounting to 10% of the tax liability.
The assessee submitted that the Deputy Commissioner (ST) GST Appeals/second respondent rejected the appeal solely on the ground that the appeal was filed beyond the condonable period of limitation by 5 days.
The department submitted that the assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 35 days and the department, rightly rejected the appeal on the sole ground that it was beyond the condonable period of limitation by 5 days.
The bench opined that the delay of 35 days in filing the appeal, while significant, could be condoned in the interests of justice, considering the circumstances surrounding the delay and the actions already taken by the assessee to discharge a substantial portion of the disputed tax liability.
In view of the above, the bench quashed the order and remanded the matter back to the department for fresh consideration.
Case Title: Tvl. Chennais Pet v. The State Tax Officer
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 70
Case Number: W.P.(MD)No.3995 of 2025
Counsel for Petitioner/ Assessee: Saitanya Kesan
Counsel for Respondent/ Department: J.K. Jayaselan