Case Law Details
Kasturi & Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals-1) (Madras High Court)
In Kasturi & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Appeals-1), the petitioner challenged an appellate order rejecting their refund appeal due to a procedural delay. The petitioner had applied for a GST refund under Section 54 of the GST Act, but the application was rejected on 30th August 2022. They filed an appeal online on 31st October 2022, within the prescribed time limit of 28th November 2022. However, the appeal was dismissed by the appellate authority as the hard copy of the appeal was submitted only on 2nd August 2023. The petitioner argued that the online submission was valid and within the deadline, as per Rule 108 of the GST Rules. The court observed that since the original order was uploaded on the GST portal, the online filing was sufficient, and the delay in submitting the hard copy was a procedural issue. The Madras High Court set aside the appellate order and directed the authority to process the appeal in accordance with the law. The case was disposed of without costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
In this writ petition, an appellate order dated 13.03.2024 is assailed. The petitioner had applied for refund under Section 54 of applicable GST enactments. Such application was rejected by order dated 30.08.2022. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the appellate authority by presenting such appeal online on 31.10.2022. The time limit for filing such appeal was up to 28.11.2022. On account of the hard copy of the appeal being submitted on 02.08.2023, 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.
3. Mr. Rajnish Pathiyil, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice for the respondent. He submits that the date of issuance of provisional acknowledgment shall be considered as the date of filing of the appeal only if the order appealed against was uploaded on the common portal.
4. The petitioner has placed on record evidence that the appeal was filed in Form GST APL-01 through the online mode on the GST portal on 31.10.2022. Such filing was in accordance with Rule 108(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (the GST Rules) and within the prescribed period of limitation.
5. Sub-rule(3) of Rule 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is pertinent for the adjudication of this writ petition. The said sub-rule is extracted below:
“(3) Where the decision or order appealed against is uploaded on the common portal, a final acknowledgement, indicating appeal number, shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02 by the Appellate Authority or an officer authorised by him in this behalf and the date of issue of the provisional acknowledgement shall be considered as the date of filing of appeal:
Provided that where the decision or order appealed against is not uploaded on the common portal, the appellant shall submit a self-certified copy of the said decision or order within a period of seven days from the date of filing of FORM GST APL-01 and a final acknowledgement, indicating appeal number, shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02 by the Appellate Authority or an officer authorised by him in this behalf, and the date of issue of the provisional acknowledgment shall be considered as the date of filing of appeal:
Provided further that where the said self-certified copy of the decision or order is not submitted within a period of seven days from the date of filing of FORM GST APL-01, the date of submission of such copy shall be considered as the date of filing of appeal.
Explanation. – For the provisions of this rule, the appeal shall be treated as filed only when the final acknowledgment, indicating the appeal number, is issued.”
6. The above sub-rule indicates clearly that the requirement of filing a self-certified copy of the order appealed against becomes applicable, as per the first proviso thereto, only where the order appealed against is not uploaded on the common portal. In the case at hand, the order was duly uploaded on the common portal. In such event, the date of online filing is the date of filing of the appeal. Even otherwise, the filing of a hard copy is a purely procedural Consequently, the impugned order is not sustainable.
7. Therefore, impugned order dated 13.03.2024 is set aside and the appellate authority is directed to receive and dispose of the
8. W.P.No.18656 of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Author Bio
