Vasanta Resorts And Spa Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Himachal Pradesh High Court)
Summary: Himachal Pradesh High Court set aside the order dated 26 February 2026 by which the petitioner’s GST appeal had been dismissed as time-barred and remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority for a fresh decision on merits. M/s Vasanta Resorts and Spa Pvt. Limited had approached the High Court being aggrieved by the retrospective amendment of Section 17(5)(d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as well as dismissal of its appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act on limitation instead of merits. The petitioner submitted that the Appellate Authority had no statutory power to condone delay beyond the permissible period and, therefore, it had no other efficacious alternative remedy for obtaining consideration of the appeal on merits.
The Court noted that under the CGST Act, once the outer limit of the period capable of being condoned is prescribed, the Appellate Authority cannot condone delay beyond one month after expiry of three months. At that stage, the petitioner confined the relief sought to setting aside the appellate order and remanding the matter for decision on merits, while reserving liberty to separately challenge the validity or constitutionality of the amendment to Section 17(5)(d). The High Court accordingly set aside the appellate order dated 26 February 2026 and directed the petitioner to appear before the Appellate Authority on 10 August 2026.
The Appellate Authority was directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits within ten weeks. Liberty was reserved to the parties to avail appropriate remedies for surviving grievances, and specifically to the petitioner to assail the amendment to Section 17(5)(d), if required or desired, in accordance with law.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Notice. Ms. Rita Thakur, Senior Panel Counsel and Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General, appear, waive and accept service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondent Nos.2 to 4 respectively.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by retrospective amendment of Section 17(5)(d) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘CGST Act’) as well as dismissal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 107 of CGST Act as being time-barred, instead of deciding the same on merits.
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Appellate Authority had no power to condone the delay in filing the appeal and, therefore, the appeal has been dismissed in view of the statutory provisions of the CGST Act. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no other efficacious alternative remedy for seeking a direction to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on merits except by approaching this Court.
4. In view of the provisions of CGST Act, once outer limit of period, which can be condoned by the authority, has been prescribed under the Act, the Appellate Authority is not competent to condone the delay beyond the one month after expiry of three months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied if the impugned order dated 26.02.2026 (Annexure P-13), passed in appeal, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority for deciding the appeal on merits instead of dismissing it on the ground of being barred by limitation, but reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the validity/constitutionality of the amendment to Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act in appropriate proceedings, if so required, as permissible under law.
6. Detailed impugned order by Appellate Authority was pronounced on 26.02.2026. It was communicated to the petitioner along with a letter dated 10.03.2026 (Annexure P-13) and was uploaded on the Department’s website on 17.04.2026 (Annexure P14).
7. In view of the above, impugned order dated 26.02.2026 (Annexure P-13) is set aside and matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal afresh on its own merits instead of dismissing it as barred by limitation.
8. Petitioner is directed to ensure its representation/ presence before Appellate Authority on 08.2026 and thereafter, Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal afresh on merits within 10 weeks.
9. Parties shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy, as may be available to them in accordance with law for redressal of surviving grievances, if any.
10. Petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms by reserving liberty to the petitioner to assail the amendment to Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, if so required/desired, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Notes:
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes
