Pawan Fabrics Vs Commissioner ( Punjab and Haryana High Court)
In the case of Pawan Fabrics Vs Commissioner, the Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of an appeal by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds of filing beyond the prescribed limitation period under the GST Act. The petitioner cited exceptional circumstances, including mental stress and business hardships caused by the second lockdown, which hindered the timely filing of the appeal. The petitioner submitted medical records to support his claim and sought relief to reinstate his GST registration for restarting his business.
The petitioner relied on the High Court’s earlier judgment in M/s Vasudeva Engineering Vs Union of India, which held that procedural delays in filing appeals should not render a person remedy-less, especially in cases where GST registration cancellation affects broader business operations. The court in that case underscored the importance of providing an opportunity for appeals to ensure justice and maintain business continuity.
The respondents opposed the petition, arguing that the delay was fatal and non-condonable. However, the court, referencing the Supreme Court judgment in M/s Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Punjab, highlighted that procedural rules should not be rigidly applied to deny substantive justice. The High Court emphasized that appellate authorities must balance procedural compliance with the fundamental right to be heard.
Acknowledging the petitioner’s medical condition and financial struggles, the court condoned the delay and directed the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the appeal on its merits. It instructed both parties to be given a fair hearing and ordered that the matter be resolved within three months. This decision reinforces the principle that procedural delays, when reasonably justified, should not obstruct access to justice or the revival of businesses.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
