Shaik Abdul Azeez Vs State of Andhra Pradesh
Date: January 8, 2024
Subject Matter
Delay in GST Appeal Despite Statutory Bar Condoned Due to Taxpayer's ill-health
Summary
The petitioner's GST registration was canceled by an order dated March 13, 2023. The petitioner filed a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (APGST Act), but the appeal was rejected at the admission stage because it was barred by limitation. The delay was 128 days beyond the condonable period (three months initial limitation plus one month condonable period).
The petitioner argued that the delay was due to a genuine reason: ill health, including a surgery and subsequent bed rest, which prevented him from looking after his business or being aware of the order. The petitioner referred to a coordinate bench judgment that had previously condoned a delay on similar grounds.
The court noted that the Appellate Authority acted correctly under the strict terms of Section 107, as it has no statutory power to condone delay beyond the prescribed period. However, the court decided to intervene using its writ jurisdiction.
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, setting aside the dismissal on the ground of limitation and directing the Appellate Authority to hear the appeal on its merits.
Sufficient Cause: The Court found the cause shown in the affidavit—ill health, including a surgery and bed rest—to be sufficient for not preferring the appeal in time.
Exercise of Writ Jurisdiction: The Court held that appeal is a valuable statutory right. To do "complete justice" and provide an opportunity for a hearing on the merits, the Court exercised its writ jurisdiction to condone the delay, overriding the statutory bar under Section 107 of the APGST Act.
Condition Imposed: The Court condoned the delay subject to the petitioner depositing Costs of ₹20,000/- before the Appellate Authority within two weeks from the date of receiving the order.
Direction to Appellate Authority: The Appellate Authority is directed to consider and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with the law, expeditiously, upon payment of the imposed costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Heard Ms. Jyothi Ratna Anumolu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.A.V.Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Commercial Tax-I for the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the present writ petition is being decided finally at this stage.
3. The petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled by order dated 13.03.2023 after show cause notice dated 14.01.2023. The petitioner filed appeal under Section 107 of Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘APGST Act’) which was rejected at the admission stage on the ground that it was barred by limitation and beyond the condonable statutory period.
4. The appeal was beyond the condonable period by 128 days. Under Section 107 of APGST Act, the appeal was to be filed within a period of limitation, in the present case, three months. The condonable period thereafter was one month. The appellate authority under the statutory provision has no power to condone the delay beyond the condonable statutory period. Consequently, the appeal was rejected.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause of the delay in not preferring the appeal within the statutory period as also the condonable period was that the petitioner’s health was not good and he was on bed rest. In this regard para Nos.4 & 7 of the affidavit have been referred.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance in W.P.No.17349 of 2023 decided on 04.08.2023, in which a Coordinate Bench of this Court, after finding that the sufficient cause was shown to condone the delay in filing the appeal, remitted the matter to the appellate authority, by imposing the condition for payment of Rs.20,000/-.
7. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax submits that considering the judgment of the coordinate Bench, the present matter may also be decided finally.
8. We have considered the submissions advanced.
9. In para-4 of the affidavit it is deposed that the petitioner had undergone surgery and was unable to look after his business. In para-7 of the affidavit it is submitted that the order of cancellation of registration was not communicated to the petitioner physically and on account of the petitioner’s health condition, the petitioner could also not be aware of the impugned order.
10. In Ex.P3 annexed FORM GST APL-01 para-17 also it is mentioned that ‘reasons for delay – Health is not well… took bed rest’.
11. The cause as shown in the affidavit is sufficient.
12. Though the impugned order in view of Section 107 of APGST Act does not suffer from any illegality, as the appellate authority cannot condone the delay beyond statutory condonable period but considering that there was sufficient cause for not preferring appeal in time, the interest of justice requires condonation of the delay. The appeal is a valuable statutory right. In exercise of writ jurisdiction to do complete justice and provide opportunity of hearing on merits of the appeal, we condone the delay by imposing costs of Rs.20,000/-. The appellate authority shall consider and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law, expeditiously. The Costs shall be deposited in two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order before the appellate authority.
13. The Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
14. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand dismissed.