The Madras High Court has condoned a 110-day delay in filing Goods and Service Tax (GST) appeal citing the ill-health of the petitioner’s Authorized Representative as a genuine reason for the delay and directed the petitioner to pay an additional 5% of the disputed tax amount to proceed with the appeal.
Tvl.Kolors Healthcare LLP (Petitioner) filed writ petitions challenging an assessment order dated 20th June 2024 and a subsequent rejection order dated 17th February 2025, respectively. The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the ill-health of their Authorized Representative, which prevented timely action.
Read More: No GST Council Meeting in 2025…yet! Behind the Delay and Beyond the Horizon
The assessment order was passed by the State Tax Officer on 20th June 2024. The petitioner failed to file an appeal within the stipulated time and submitted it on 7th February 2025, with a delay of 110 days. The appeal was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), acting as the Appellate Authority, on the grounds that the delay exceeded the condonable period.
Confused by Complex GST Provisions and Legal Disputes in Real Estate? Get Clarity and Practical Solutions from Industry Experts- Enroll Now
The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the delay was unintentional and caused by the Authorized Representative’s health issues, which left the petitioner unaware of the assessment order. The Counsel for the Respondent argued that the delay was due to the fault of the petitioner. The counsel submitted before the court to pass appropriate orders.
The bench comprising Justice Krishnan Ramasamy, observed that the reason for the delay appeared genuine. The court observed that the petitioner had already paid 10% of the disputed tax amount as a pre-deposit while filing the appeal.
The court directed the petitioner to pay an additional 5% of the disputed tax amount. The court set aside the rejection order dated 17th February 2025. The Court condoned the delay, subject to the additional payment of disputed tax amount.
The Court directed the Appellate Authority to take the appeal on record and pass orders on merits after providing the petitioner sufficient opportunity for a hearing. The writ petition challenging the assessment order was dismissed, as the matter was to be addressed through the appeal process.
The court disposed of the appeal with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
