CESTAT Erred in Dismissing Appeal Without Noting AA’s Order Returned Undelivered: Madras HC directs CESTAT to Admit Appeal [Read Order]

The Madras High Court has held that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) erred in dismissing an appeal as time-barred without considering the fact that the Appellate Authority ( AA )’s order was returned undelivered.

The appeal was filed to challenge an order dated 29.03.2023 issued by the Commissioner (Appeals-II). According to the appellant, the said order was never received.

The appellant contended that they first came to know about the adverse order only when their bank account was frozen by the department. In support of this claim, the appellant produced a communication dated 11.11.2024 obtained under the Right to Information Act.

Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here

Also read: How much Can Chartered Accountants Charge for GST Registration, Returns & Other Services: Here’s ICAI’s Suggestion

The document revealed that the appellate order was dispatched by speed post on 30.03.2023 but was returned undelivered, with no explanation provided for the non-delivery. The department neither filed any affidavit nor offered any justification in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.

The RTI response also mentioned that the order was subsequently emailed to the appellant’s Chartered Accountant, Vijay Sukumar, on 13.04.2023. However, the appellant asserted that the Chartered Accountant never received the email and speculated that it might have landed in the spam folder. The important fact is that the CESTAT’s impugned order did not take any of these facts into account.

Also read: Businesses can Rectify GST Returns Even After Prescribed Due dates: Supreme Court directs CBIC to Re-examine Timelines Correcting Bonafide Errors

Step by Step Guidance for Tax Audit & E-filing, Click Here

The court observed that there is no evidence to refute the appellant’s version and finding merit in the plea, Justice Krishnan Ramasamy held that the delay, if any, deserved to be condoned.  Accordingly, the Court set aside the CESTAT’s order and directed its Registry to register the appeal and place it before the Tribunal for adjudication on merits.

Also read:  GST Consultant filed Cryptic Reply without Evidence against SCN: Madras HC Allows to Contest Demand on 25% Pre-Deposit

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates