Case Law Details
Enkay Polymers Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
In the case of Enkay Polymers vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others, the Allahabad High Court addressed a key procedural issue concerning the submission of certified copies in GST appeals. The petitioner, Enkay Polymers, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging an order dated July 03, 2023, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal)-IV, State Tax Ghaziabad. The order rejected the petitioner’s appeal on the grounds that it was time-barred because the self-certified copy of the decision or order was not submitted within the required time frame as stipulated by Rule 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017.
The petitioner argued that under Rule 108, when an appeal is filed electronically via the common portal in FORM GST APL-01, there is no requirement to submit a self-certified copy of the decision. This requirement only applies if the appeal is not uploaded on the common portal. Rule 108 provides that an appeal must be filed in FORM GST APL-01 along with relevant documents, either electronically or otherwise as notified. The rule also specifies that if the decision appealed against is uploaded on the common portal, a final acknowledgment indicating the appeal number shall be issued, and the date of the provisional acknowledgment will be considered as the date of filing the appeal. If the decision is not uploaded on the common portal, the appellant must submit a self-certified copy within seven days of filing FORM GST APL-01.
The court referred to decisions from other High Courts to support its stance. The Orissa High Court in the case of Atlas PVC Pipes Ltd. vs. State of Odisha held that the non-submission of a certified copy is a technical defect and should not lead to the dismissal of an appeal if the copy was uploaded on the GST portal. Similarly, the Madras High Court in PKV Agencies vs. Appellate Dy. Commissioner (GST) (Appeals), Vellore concluded that the requirement to furnish a certified copy within seven days is a procedural requirement. It can be condoned under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as it is a technical defect.
The Allahabad High Court noted these precedents and examined Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, in conjunction with Rule 108 of the CGST Rules, 2017. The court concluded that if an appeal is filed electronically within the prescribed time frame of three months, the non-filing of a certified copy within seven days should not result in the dismissal of the appeal. The court held that this procedural requirement is a technicality and should not override the merits of the appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
