TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 722X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal has been rejected on the ground of the same being barred by limitation - Section 107 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The appellate authority in rejecting the application for condonation of delay and as a consequence rejecting the appeal vide his impugned order dated 30.06.2020 on the ground of delay, does not seem to be proper, legal and justified. The appellate authority ought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -10-2020 - HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY For Petitioners : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. S. Dubey, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Union of India : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, ASG Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 30.06.2020 whereby the appeal preferred by the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that subsequent to the petitioners coming to know about the impugned order having been passed by the assessing authority, they had immediately preferred an appeal before the appellate authority along with an application for condonation of delay. Subsequently, the appellate authority vide order dated 04.03.2020 Annexure P-10 had called for an explanat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onically also. He submits that the appellate authority seems to have gone through the submission that the petitioners had made in their application for condonation of delay particularly in paragraph-3 wherein they are referring DRC-07 as also e-notice and e-order and have not referred as order under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners disputes the fact that it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings, the impugned order, in the opinion of this Court, is not sustainable and the same deserves to be and is accordingly set aside. 8. The matter stands remitted back to the appellate authority i.e. respondent no.1 to consider and decide the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay on its own merits after due verification of the facts and also on due consideration of the conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
