Rajasthan HC Condones Delay in GST Appeal Due to Ineffective Order Communication

By CA Sandeep Kanoi Goods and Services Tax Judiciary August 13, 2026

Case Name: Royal Petro And Chemicals Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court)
Appeal Number: Only available for paid members
Date of Judgement/Order: Only available for paid members
Courts: All High Courts, Rajasthan High Court

Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.

Already Upgraded? Log in.

Royal Petro And Chemicals Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court)

The Rajasthan High Court considered a writ petition seeking condonation of delay and a direction to entertain an appeal against an Order-in-Original dated 17.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Circle-B Bhiwadi. The order raised a GST demand of Rs.3,77,469/- for Financial Year 2018-19 on account of availment of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner stated that the order had not been effectively communicated and was merely uploaded on the GST Portal. Since no opportunity of personal hearing had been granted despite the petitioner having submitted a detailed reply, the petitioner bona fide believed that no final order had been passed. The petitioner stated that knowledge of the order was acquired subsequently and that immediate steps were taken to challenge it, but by then the appeal appeared as time-barred on the GST Portal.

The petitioner submitted that the delay was bona fide and resulted from the absence of effective communication of the order and failure to provide the opportunity of personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017. Reliance was placed on Division Bench judgments of the Rajasthan High Court, including M/s M R Traders v. UOI, M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Or, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors., RPC PSIPL 3V Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., and RPC PSIPL 3V Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. The respondents opposed the petition, submitting that the impugned order was validly passed and the appeal was barred by limitation.

The Rajasthan High Court observed that although the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory limitation prescribed under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, the reasons preventing the petitioner from filing the appeal within the stipulated period were beyond its control. The Court held that non-adjudication of the appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner. Following its consistent view in the judgments cited, the Court allowed the writ petition to the extent of condoning the delay. The Appellate Authority was directed to entertain the appeal and adjudicate it on merits, provided the appeal was filed within 30 days of the order being uploaded on the Court’s website. All pending applications were disposed of.

Cases Discussed

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction commanding respondents to entertain the appeal and also condone the delay and allow the filing of appeal against the impugned Order-in-Original, dated 17.12.2025 (Financial Years 2018-19) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Circle-B Bhiwadi, whereby GST demand of Rs.3,77,469/- for Financial Years 2018-19, was raised on the account of availment of Input Tax Credit by the petitioner. The appeal against the said orders could not per force be filed before the Appellate Authority as the online status of the appeal would reveal that the same is time-barred. The petitioner is thus left remediless. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed the instant writ petition on 21.07.2026.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not file the statutory appeal within the prescribed period as the impugned Order-in-Original was never effectively communicated to the petitioner and was merely uploaded on the GST Portal. Having submitted a detailed reply and no opportunity of personal hearing having ever been granted, the petitioner bona fide believed that no final order had yet been passed. The petitioner acquired knowledge of the impugned order only subsequently, whereafter immediate steps were taken to challenge the same. However, by then, the appeal had become time-barred on the GST Portal.

2.1 She further submits that the delay is bona fide and occurred solely due to the absence of effective communication of the impugned order and the failure of the respondents to afford the mandatory opportunity of personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017. Immediately upon acquiring knowledge of the impugned order, the petitioner took prompt steps to seek legal recourse.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s M R Traders v. UOI¹, M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Or², Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors.³, RPC PSIPL 3V Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.⁴ and RPC PSIPL 3V Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.^s argues that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by this Court.

5. Learned counsels for the respondents oppose the above submission and contends that the impugned order has rightly been passed and appeal is now barred by limitation.

6. Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, however, considering the reasons owing to which the petitioner could not submit its appeal within the stipulated time, being beyond its control, non-adjudication of appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.

7. In the judgments cited above, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits.

8. In the premise, following the consistent view as already taken by this Court, ibid, we allow the present writ petition to the extent of condoning the delay in filing of the appeal by the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority shall now entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the same on merits, provided the same is filed within 30 days of the instant order being uploaded on the website of this court.

10. All pending application(s) stand disposed of.

Notes:

¹ 2026 SCC OnLine RAJ 2115

² 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3938

³ D.B. CWP 14658/2024

⁴ D.B. CWP 7260/2025

⁵ D.B. CWP 11794/2025