GST Appeal Filing Delayed due to Confusion in GST Rate: Madras HC Orders Department to Hear Govt Civil Contractor’s Case [Read Order]

The Madras High Court has allowed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a delayed appeal and an ex parte assessment order issued under the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) Act.

The petitioner, Tvl.SSB Construction a proprietary concern engaged in government civil works contracts, had filed the writ seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned orders issued by the GSTauthorities.

Complete Referencer of GSTR-1, GSTR-1A, GSTR-3B, GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C, Click Here

The petitioner challenged the rejection order of the first respondent - Deputy Commissioner (CT) dated 15.04.2025 and the assessment order of the second respondent - State Tax Officer dated 30.07.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2022-2023.

These proceedings were initiated following a show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 14.08.2023, alleging discrepancies between the returns filed in GSTR-3Band GSTR-7.

The petitioner submitted a reply explaining that the alleged discrepancy was due to an error in computing taxable turnover in the notice, and requested the authorities to drop the proceedings. However, the second respondent proceeded to pass the assessment order without due consideration of the petitioner’s objections.

Subsequently, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent, which was delayed by 37 days. The delay, as explained in the petition, occurred because the petitioner had approached the Block Development Officer (BDO) to remit the tax, but the BDO declined the request citing that the applicable rate was 12% and not 18% as per the assessment. The appeal was rejected solely on the ground of delay.

During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel contended that the delay was neither intentional nor due to negligence but caused by confusion over the applicable tax rate. The counsel argued that the Appellate Authority ought to have taken a liberal view and considered the appeal on merits.

GST READY RECKONER: Complete Topic wise Circulars, Instructions & Guidelines Click here

Justice N. Mala concurred with the petitioner’s submission, observing that the delay had been reasonably and satisfactorily explained.

Holding that the first respondent’s rejection order warranted interference, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the first respondent to entertain the petitioner’s appeal without reference to the delay. The respondent was further instructed to dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law at the earliest.

Mr.S.Kumaraganeshan appeared for the petitioner and Mr.V.Prasanth Kiran, Govt. Advocate appeared for the department.