Rahul Bansal Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Calcutta High Court)
In Rahul Bansal vs. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, the Calcutta High Court addressed issues arising from technical glitches that affected the appeal process under Section 129(3) of the GST Act. The petitioner, M/s R.S. Steel Company, had faced penalties and order rejections due to issues in their appeal filings. Despite submitting an appeal on time, technical problems led to automatic rejection, which was later compounded by a delay in a subsequent appeal. The High Court found that these technical errors should not obstruct the petitioner’s statutory right to challenge the order. It ruled that the appellate authority must consider the appeal on merits and hear the case without requiring further pre-deposit. The court’s decision emphasized that technical problems should not invalidate legal rights, and directed the appellate authority to process the appeal within six weeks. This ruling reinforces that procedural issues like technical glitches cannot deny individuals their right to contest orders effectively.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the orders dated 30th June 2023 and 19th September, 2023 both passed under Sections 107 of the GST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”).
