Sufa Engineers Vs Deputy Commissioner State Taxes Appeals II (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that delay of one day in filing of an appeal under GST is condonable since the reason assigned for the delay appears to be genuine. Accordingly, the delay condoned and writ allowed.
Facts- The present petition has been filed by the petitioner. It is contested that the assessment order was passed on 30.01.2024. However, since the assessment order was only uploaded in the portal the petitioner had failed to take note of the same, due to which, there was a delay of 1 day. However, the said delay of 1 day is beyond the condonable period and hence, the appeal was rejected by the respondent, vide impugned rejection order dated 22.04.2025, on the aspect of limitation. Hence, he requests this Court to condone the delay and pass appropriate orders.
Conclusion- Held that the petitioner had failed to take note of the same, due to which, there was a delay of 1 day in filing the appeal. The above reason assigned by the petitioner, for the delay in filing the appeal against the assessment order, appears to be genuine. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to condone the delay, in filing the appeal against the assessment order.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned rejection order dated 22.04.2025 by the 1st respondent.
2. Ms. K. Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petitions are taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, initially, the assessment order was passed on 30.01.2024. Aggrieved over the said assessment order, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner on 30.05.2024. Since the assessment order was only uploaded in the portal the petitioner had failed to take note of the same, due to which, there was a delay of 1 day. However, the said delay of 1 day is beyond the condonable period and hence, the appeal was rejected by the respondent, vide impugned rejection order dated 22.04.2025, on the aspect of limitation. Hence, he requests this Court to condone the delay and pass appropriate orders.
4. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the delay may be condoned and requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.
6. In the case on hand, the assessment order came to be passed on 30.01.2024. Aggrieved over the same, the appeal was belatedly preferred by the petitioner, i.e., with a delay of 1 day. Since the delay was beyond the condonnable period, the said appeal was rejected by the respondent vide impugned order dated 22.04.2025. According to the petitioner, Since the ex parte assessment order was only uploaded in the portal, the petitioner had failed to take note of the same, due to which, there was a delay of 1 day in filing the appeal.
7. The above reason assigned by the petitioner, for the delay in filing the appeal against the assessment order, appears to be genuine. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to condone the delay, in filing the appeal against the assessment order. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) The appeal rejection order dated 22.04.2025 passed by the 1strespondent is set aside and the delay of 1 day in filing the appeal before the 1st respondent is hereby condoned.
(ii) The 1strespondent is directed to take the appeal on record and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.
8. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
