Akshaya Meditech Vs Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court has allowed a taxpayer, Akshaya Meditech, to file a Goods and Services Tax (GST) appeal despite a delay of approximately 210 days. The court accepted the petitioner’s argument that they were unaware of the show cause notice and the final assessment order as these were allegedly only uploaded on the GST portal without physical intimation.
The case pertains to a tax demand for the financial year 2018-19 related to the adjustment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The tax authorities had flagged an issue where IGST credit was reportedly wrongly adjusted against CGST and SGST dues, leading to a demand for the latter taxes along with interest and penalty.
According to the petitioner, the show cause notice dated January 31, 2024, and the subsequent assessment order dated April 22, 2024, were merely uploaded onto the GST portal. It was contended that no physical copy was sent, leaving the petitioner unaware of the proceedings and the resulting order. This lack of awareness was cited as the reason for the substantial delay in filing the appeal.
When the petitioner attempted to file an appeal with the Appellate Authority after depositing the mandatory 10% of the disputed tax, it was rejected due to being beyond the permissible time limit for condonation.
Appearing before the High Court, the tax department argued that the delay exceeded the maximum period allowed by statute for condonation.
However, the High Court, after considering the submissions, found the petitioner’s explanation for the delay—that they were unaware of the notice and order due to lack of physical intimation and sole reliance on the portal—to be “genuine.”
Exercising its writ jurisdiction, the court decided to condone the delay of roughly 210 days. As a condition for this condonation, the court directed the petitioner to deposit an additional 15% of the disputed tax amount, bringing the total pre-deposit to 25% of the disputed tax demand.
The Appellate Authority has been instructed to accept the appeal subject to this additional payment and proceed to decide the case on its merits after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The court’s decision allows the taxpayer to present their case before the appellate forum despite the significant delay, emphasizing the importance of effective communication of notices and orders to taxpayers. No specific judicial precedents were cited in the text of this judgment.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
