Thirumalai Balaji Constructions Vs Deputy Commissioner (ST)
Date: June 1, 2025
Subject Matter
Taxpayer allowed to file delayed GST Appeal manually with 25% Pre-Deposit
Summary
The Madras High Court delivered a ruling on three writ petitions filed by Thirumalai Balaji Constructions challenging the assessment orders for the financial years 2017-18, 2019-20, and 2020-21. The petitioner failed to file statutory appeals within the mandated 90-day period following the Deputy Commissioner's orders due to cancellation of their GST registration. Despite the Supreme Court's position on not entertaining petitions beyond the limitation period, the Madras High Court observed its own precedent of allowing appeals under similar circumstances, contingent upon a 25% pre-deposit of the disputed tax amount. Thus, the court permitted the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within 30 days of receiving its order, with the condition of depositing the pre-determined amount either through an Electronic Cash Register or a Demand Draft. Given the cancellation of the petitioner’s GST registration, the court permitted the physical filing of appeals, instructing the Appellate Commissioner to accept these filings without referencing the delay and to decide them based on merit within three months while ensuring that the petitioner is given a hearing. The High Court concluded by disposing of the writ petitions without imposing costs.
By this common order, these three Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal. These Writ Petitions are filed against the impugned orders dated 30.09.2024 passed by the second respondent in Form GST ASMT 14 for the assessment years 2017-18, 2019-20 and 2020-21.
2. The petitioner has not filed appeals before the ADC (GST) Appeals, Trichy, within 90 days as required in intimation to the petitioner vide impugned orders dated 30.09.2024.
3. Long after the expiry of the limitation, the present Writ Petitions have been filed and listed for admission. Although the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that there is no scope of entertaining the Writ Petition after the expiry of the limitation, this Court has taken consistent stand to allow the petitioner under the similar circumstances to file an appeal, subject to pre-deposit of 25% of the disputed tax. This stand has not been deviated and has been followed regularly.
4. Therefore, these Writ Petitions are disposed of at the time of admission by permitting the petitioner to file statutory appeal within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax through cash in the Electronic Cash Register or by furnishing Demand Draft for the same effect.
5. Since the registration has already been cancelled, the petitioner is permitted to file physical copy of the appeals before the Appellate Commissioner, who shall dispose of the same without reference to limitation. Since the dispute is pertaining to the assessment years 2017-18, 2019-20 and 2020-21, the Appellate Commissioner shall endeavour to pass an order on merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of numbering of the respective appeals. Needless to state, the petitioner shall be heard before disposing of the respective appeals.
6. These Writ Petitions are disposed of, with above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.