Mehtab Singh S/o Sujan Singh Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
Summary: Rajasthan High Court condoned a delay of 84 days in filing an appeal against the order dated 26.06.2024 cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration and directed the Appellate Authority to adjudicate the appeal on merits. The petitioner had filed the appeal on 19.12.2024, but the Appellate Authority dismissed it on 04.09.2025 on limitation, holding that it had no power to condone the delay of 84 days. The petitioner explained that around the time the cancellation order was passed, he was preoccupied with the serious illness of his father and consequently could not take timely steps for filing the revocation application/appeal. It was submitted that the delay was bona fide, unavoidable, neither intentional nor mala fide, and that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue by condonation.
The High Court acknowledged that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory limitation prescribed under Section 107 of the RGST Act. However, considering that the circumstances preventing timely filing were beyond the petitioner’s control, the Court held that non-adjudication of the appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice. The petitioner relied upon the Rajasthan High Court’s Division Bench decisions in M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors., Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Department & Ors. and two decisions in RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., where delayed GST appeals had been directed to be entertained on merits. Following the same view, the High Court allowed the writ petition to the extent of condoning the 84-day delay. The appellate order dated 04.09.2025 was set aside and the Appellate Authority was directed to entertain and adjudicate the petitioner’s appeal on merits. The Court did not itself adjudicate the validity of the GST registration cancellation.
Cases Discussed
- RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court); D.B. CWP 11794/2025.
- RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court); D.B. CWP 7260/2025.
- Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court); D.B. CWP 14658/2024.
- M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court); D.B. CWP 12076/2024.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction commanding respondent No.3 to condone the delay of 84 days in filing the appeal against the assessment order dated 26.06.2024 (Annexure-3), passed by the Assistant Commissioner, whereby order for cancellation of registration issued against the petitioner. The appeal against the said order was filed on 19.12.2024. However, the Appellate Authority vide order dated 04.09.2025 dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation as it does not have the power to condone the delay of 84 days in filing the appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in filing the appeal occurred due to bonafide and unavoidable circumstances. Around the time of passing of the impugned order dated 26.06.2024, the petitioner was preoccupied with the serious illness of his father, due to which the petitioner was unable to take timely steps for filing the revocation application/appeal. Consequently, the petitioner could not prefer an appeal within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The delay is neither intentional nor mala fide, and no prejudice would be caused to the respondent if the delay is condoned.
2.1. The appeal challenging the order dated 26.06.2024 was ultimately filed on 19.12.2024 and was dismissed vide order dated 04.09.2025 by the Appellate Authority.
3. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors 1, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors., RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors 3 and RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors 4 argues that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by this court.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the above submission and contends that the assessment order has rightly been passed, appeal is now barred by limitation.
6. Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST Act, however, considering the reasons owing to which the petitioner could not file its appeal within the stipulated time, being beyond its control, non- adjudication of appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.
7. In the judgments cited above, this court, while allowing the writ petitions, issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits.
8. In the premise, following the same view as already taken by various Coordinate Benches of this Court, ibid, with which we are in agreement, we allow the present writ petition to the extent of condoning the delay of 84 days in filing of the appeal by the petitioner.
9. Accordingly, the impugned appellate order dated 04.09.2025 is set aside. Delay of 84 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. The Appellate Authority is directed to entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the appeal on merits.
10. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Notes:
1 D.B. CWP 12076/2024
2 D.B. CWP 14658/2024
3 D.B. CWP 7260/2025
4 D.B. CWP 11794/2025
