Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sunbeam Generators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I) (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W. P. No. 16140 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 02/07/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Sunbeam Generators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I) (Madras High Court)

The basis for the appeal in the writ petition W.P.No.16140 of 2024 is the rejection of the petitioner’s application for a refund under Section 54 of the GST enactments. The petitioner, M/s. Sunbeam Generators Pvt. Ltd., had applied for a refund, which was initially rejected by an order dated April 13, 2022. The petitioner then filed an appeal against this rejection online on June 28, 2022, within the prescribed time limit, which was up to July 12, 2022. However, the hard copy of the appeal was submitted on May 23, 2023, which led to the appeal being rejected by the appellate authority. The appellate authority’s decision, as mentioned in the document, was to reject the appeal due to the late submission of the hard copy. This decision was challenged in the writ petition on the grounds that the appeal was filed within the time limit online and that the hard copy submission is a procedural requirement that does not affect the timeliness of the appeal. The High Court of Judicature at Madras, presided over by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, found that the appeal was indeed filed within the time limit online and in accordance with the relevant GST rules. The court set aside the impugned order of the appellate authority and directed the appellate authority to receive and dispose of the appeal on its merits.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

In this writ petition, an appellate order dated 24.01.2024 is assailed. The petitioner had applied for refund under Section 54 of applicable GST enactments. Such application was rejected by order dated 13.04.2022. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the appellate authority by presenting such appeal online on 28.06.2022. The time limit for filing such appeal was up to 12.07.2022. On account of the hard copy of the appeal being submitted on 23.05.2023, the appeal was rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the facts set out above and submitted that interference with the impugned order is warranted in as much as the appeals were filed within time.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Author Bio

My name DEEPAK GUPTA. I completed my professional degree as LLB. in 2007 and have 17 years of experience working as lawyer in field of Indirect Taxation. While working for my parental company Jananrdhan Gupta & Co. Advocates, estb. in 1965, carried legacy in law turn into Dejure Partners LLP. I View Full Profile

My Published Posts

ITC alleged from Non Existence Entity/ Bail Granted in GST | Tax Evasion Case Constitutional Validity of section 16(4) read with section 16(2)(c) CGST Act, 2017 Penalty for non issuance of E-Invoice – Where supply is exempt under GST? Agricultural Produce Under GST Regime View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031