Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2020 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 1336 - HC - GSTCondonation of delay in filing appeal - petition rejected on the ground of the same having barred by limitation - HELD THAT:- The undisputed factual matrix of the case is that the Adjudicating Authority had passed the order on 26.06.2019, there is no dispute so far as the order being communicated to the petitioner and as such the appeal ought to have been filed by 26.09.2019 that is three months' period provided u/s 107 of the Chhattisgarh GST Act of 2017. The appeal in the instant case has been filed on 16.12.2019 that is even after the three months from the date limitation expired. Sub-section 4 of Section 107 of the Chhattisgarh GST Act confers the Appellate Authority with the power to condone the delay, if the appeal is filed within a period of one month from the date limitation stood expired. The fact that there is an upper limit of one month provided in the statutes itself for preferring an appeal beyond the prescribed period of three months itself establishes the fact that beyond that extended period of one month after the expiry of period of limitation, the Appellate Authority becomes functus officio and would not be in a position to entertain the appeal nor does he have the power to condone the delay. The issue so far as condonation of delay is concerned beyond the limit permissible under the statutes came up for consideration before the Supreme Court recently in the case of M/s N.V. International vs. State of Assam and others [2019 (12) TMI 1515 - SUPREME COURT]. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court though under the provisions of Arbitration Act had considered the aspect whether the authority could condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the statutes, disallowing the contention and dismissing the appeal observed that once when the period is prescribed beyond the said period, the authority does not have the power to entertain the application for condoning the delay or else it will defeat the statutory purpose. This Court does not find a strong case made out by the counsel for the petitioner in the instant case calling for an interference to the order passed by the Respondent No. 3 - Petition dismissed.
|