Case Law Details
Comfort Shoe Components Vs Assistant Commissioner (Madras High Court)
Introduction: The Madras High Court, in the case of Comfort Shoe Components vs. Assistant Commissioner, has delivered a significant ruling regarding the time limit under GST Section 62(2). This case revolves around challenges to orders dated 28.03.2023 and 10.04.2023, where the respondent passed best judgment assessment orders due to the petitioner’s delay in filing returns for December 2022, January 2023, and February 2023.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner cited financial difficulties for the delay and sought the quashing of assessment orders under Section 62(1) of the GST Act. Section 62(2) allows the withdrawal of assessment orders if valid returns are filed within 30 days of service. The petitioner, filing returns late, urged the court to condone the delay.
The government advocate argued that the provision only benefits timely filers, emphasizing the petitioner’s failure to adhere to the prescribed time. The court analyzed Section 62, which empowers the authority to make best judgment assessment orders within five years from the specified date for annual return filing.
The critical question emerged: If returns are not filed within 30 days under Section 62(2), does the right to file returns still exist? The court reasoned that the 30-day limit seems directory, not mandatory. It observed that the petitioner could file returns by 30.01.2030, considering the five-year assessment window starting from 01.01.2024.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
