9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (9) TMI 1484 - HC - GSTDismissal of appeal on the ground that the appeal was filed even beyond the condonable period of limitation - provision in the Tamil Nadu Goods Service Tax Act 2017 to condone the delay and entertain the appeal - mismatch between GSTR - 3B and ITC auto populated in GSTR - 2A - HELD THAT - In the instant case on going through the assessment order it is seen that a total tax liability of Rs. 49 lakhs together with 10% penalty has been imposed against the petitioner on the ground that there was a mismatch of the input tax claim between GSTR - 3B and the ITC auto populated in GSTR - 2A. The petitioner has come up with a clear case that no opportunity was given before passing the assessment order. Hence they filed an appeal before the first respondent. However the appeal itself was dismissed by the impugned order as it was filed beyond the condonable period. However this Court is inclined to afford an opportunity to the petitioner by putting the petitioner on terms. The impugned order passed by the first respondent is hereby set aside. The delay in filing the appeal before the first respondent is condoned. The appeal filed by the petitioner shall be taken on file by the first respondent. Petition allowed.
Issues:
Challenge to dismissal of appeal due to delay in filing and lack of provision for condonation of delay under Tamil Nadu Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the order dismissing their appeal due to filing beyond the condonable period of limitation and the absence of a provision in the Tamil Nadu Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 to condone the delay. The petitioner contended that the assessment order alleged a mismatch between GSTR - 3B and ITC auto populated in GSTR - 2A, resulting in a tax and penalty amount. The appeal was filed on 02.5.2024 with a petition to condone the delay, but it was dismissed. The petitioner made a 10% payment towards pre-deposit when filing the appeal. The Special Government Pleader argued that the appeal was filed after the limitation period and the additional one-month period for showing cause had expired. The first respondent dismissed the appeal due to the delay in filing. The Court noted the absence of a provision to condone the delay under the Act but acknowledged the petitioner's claim of no opportunity before the assessment order. The Court decided to afford the petitioner an opportunity by setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal to be filed. The first respondent was directed to issue notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass final orders within three months. In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appeal was directed to be taken on file by the first respondent. The first respondent was instructed to issue notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass final orders within three months. No costs were awarded, and the connected WMPs were closed.
|
