9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority under WBGST Act, 2017 confirming the order of the Adjudicating Authority imposing penalty for availing excess Input Tax credit. 2. The facts of the case in a nutshell are that the petitioner, Smt. Dola Bharati, is the sole proprietor of M/s Divine, a business entity with its registered office at 816, South Panchpota, Sabujsangha Auto Station, Panchpota, Garia, under the jurisdiction of Sonarpur Police Station in South 24 Parganas, 700152. The petitioner is engaged in the wholesale and retail trade of various types of paper and paperboard labels, duly registered under relevant legal provisions and holding a GST registration (GSTIN: 19AKPPB5630A1ZH). In the regular course of her business, the petitioner procured goods from suppliers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cause Notice dated May 07, 2023 was subsequently issued to the petitioner, questioning the timeliness of the appeal. The petitioner responded, explaining the delay due to her husband's critical illness, which necessitated extensive medical treatment, thus impeding her ability to keep a track of GST compliance. The appeal was subsequently rejected on grounds of limitation, leading the petitioner to assert that the order dated May 24, 2023 is legally unsustainable. Owing to the unfavourable order passed by the Appellate Authority the present petition has been preferred. 6. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the order dated July 27, 2023, passed by the adjudicating authority, was issued without adhering to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly 27, 2023 and July 24, 2023 be quashed and set aside, restoring the petitioner's rights under law. 11. Submissions of the Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 is that based on the GSTIN portal, an appeal was filed under ARN - AD1903240053189 dated March 06, 2024. Under Section 107(1) of the WBGST Act, 2017, an appeal must be filed within three months from the date of the order. However, Section 107(4) permits an extension of up to one additional month in cases of compelling circumstances. Here, the appeal was filed on March 06, 2024 against an order dated July 27, 2023, exceeding the maximum allowable period of four months. 12. The respondent authorities acknowledge that a brief condonation request was included with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shabbar Rashidi held that :- "19. Section 107 of the Act of 2017 does not exclude the applicability of the Act of 1963 expressly. It does not exclude the applicability of the Act of 1963 impliedly also if one has to consider the provisions of Section 108 of the Act 2017 which provides for a power of revision to the designated authority, against an order of adjudication. In case of revision a far more enlarged period of time for the Revisional Authority to intervene has been prescribed. Two periods of limitations have been prescribed for two different authorities namely, the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority in respect of the same order of adjudication. Any interference with the order of adjudication either by the Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
