Afia Steel Ispat Private Limited Vs Rajesh Kumar (GSTAT Ghaziabad)
Summary: The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ghaziabad, dismissed the defective appeal filed by Afia Steel Ispat Private Limited against Rajesh Kumar for non-prosecution, without expressing any opinion on the merits. The Registry had identified defects in the memorandum of appeal and accompanying documents during scrutiny under the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025. Despite service of a defect memo and opportunities to comply, the appellant did not rectify the defects. Following consideration by the Assistant Registrar, the matter was placed before the Division Bench. The order records listings on 6 August, 21 August, 10 September and 25 September 2026, with no appearance for the appellant. Neither the appellant nor an authorised representative appeared when the matter was repeatedly called on the final hearing date, and no adjournment application was filed.
The Tribunal explained that merely filing an appeal does not entitle a litigant to keep defective proceedings pending indefinitely without meeting statutory requirements. It considered Rule 10 concerning inherent powers, which preserves the Tribunal’s authority to issue orders necessary to meet the ends of justice or prevent abuse of its process. It also examined Rule 24 governing scrutiny and removal of defects, including placement of unresolved defective appeals before the appropriate Bench for registration or rejection. The Tribunal referred to the legal maxims that the law assists the vigilant and that litigation should attain finality.
Finding that adequate opportunities had been afforded and that no explanation had been furnished for the continuing defaults, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant had abandoned prosecution of the appeal. It considered continued pendency purposeless and an unnecessary burden on its docket. Exercising powers under Rules 10 and 24, it dismissed the defective appeal for non-prosecution, disposed of pending applications, if any, and made no order as to costs. The order was pronounced on 15 October 2026.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GSTAT
The present Appeal was presented before the Registry of this Tribunal. Upon scrutiny under the provisions of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025, the Registry noticed certain defects in the memorandum of appeal and the accompanying documents. Despite service of the defect memo and lapse of sufficient time, the appellant failed to cure the defects. Consequently, the appeal remained defective. In accordance with Rule 24 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025, the matter was placed before the Asst Registrar. Since the defects continued to remain uncured despite the opportunity granted, the Asst Registrar directed that the defective appeal be listed before the Bench for appropriate order. Accordingly, the matter was listed before this Division Bench on 06.08.2026, 21.08.2026, 10.09.2026 and 25.09.2026. On every occasion, none appeared on behalf of the Appellant. The matter was, therefore, directed to be listed today. Today, when the matter was called in open tribunal proceeding , none appeared on behalf of the Appellant. The matter was called repeatedly during the course of the proceedings. Neither the appellant nor any authorised representative appeared. No application for adjournment has been filed. Even today, the defects pointed out by the Registry continue to remain uncured. The conduct of the appellant clearly manifests complete lack of interest in prosecuting the present appeal. A litigant invoking the statutory appellate jurisdiction of this Tribunal is expected to prosecute the proceedings with due diligence. Mere filing of an appeal does not entitle a litigant to keep defective proceedings pending indefinitely without complying with the statutory requirements. Before passing any order there is need to consider provision laid down under section 10 of the GSTAT Rule and general concept of Inherent power. Inherent Power refers to powers that are not expressly provided by statute but are necessary to secure the ends of justice; prevent abuse of the process of the Tribunal; and ensure effective exercise of the jurisdiction expressly conferred by the statute to any Tribunal or Court.
So far as GSTAT Rule is concerned Rule 10 expressly provides for inherent power of the GSTAT. As per Rule 10 nothing in these rules shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent powers of the Appellate Tribunal to make such orders or give such directions as may be necessary for meeting the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Appellate Tribunal. The above principles and law are founded upon the salutary legal maxims Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt (the law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights) and Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (it is in the public interest that there should be an end to litigation).
Now we also consider legal provision laid down under Rule 24 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025 which prescribes procedure for scrutiny of appeals and removal of defects. It envisages that where defects are not removed despite notice, the matter shall be placed before the Registrar and, thereafter, before the appropriate Bench. The Rule expressly empowers the Bench, after hearing the party, either to direct registration of the appeal or to reject the same. In the present case, the Registry followed the procedure prescribed under Rule 24. Adequate opportunities were afforded to the Appellant to remove defects. Thereafter, the matter was listed before this Division Bench on three occasions. Despite repeated opportunities, the appellant neither removed the defects nor appeared before this Tribunal. No explanation whatsoever has been furnished for such persistent default. We are, therefore, satisfied that the appellant has abandoned the prosecution of the present appeal. Keeping such a defective appeal pending would serve no useful purpose and would unnecessarily burden the docket of this Tribunal. This is a fit case for exercise of the power vested in this Bench under Rule 10 and 24 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025.
ORDER
Accordingly, in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 10 and 24 of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025, and for the reasons recorded hereinabove, the defective Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy involved. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pronounced in open Court on this 15 th day of October, 2026.
