The Calcutta High Court, remanding a matter back to the files of the GST authorities, held that the one-line order dismissing an appeal on ground of delay in filing without discussing the merits of the case shall be deemed as invalid for the Goods and Services Act, 2017.
The assessee, Ms. Usha Gupta, Proprietor of UR Enterprises, challenged an order of the GST department before the Single Judge wherein a summary order in DRC 07 was issued without any detailed order in this regard along with recovery of 90% of tax, interest and penlaty imposed even before the statutory time period of filing appeal as per extended due date given by the Supreme Court of India in suo moto extension of limitation.
The petitioner had filed appeal before the first appellate authority belatedly which was thus rejected also as time barred.
Justice Md. Nizamuddin, while remanding the matter to the first appellate authority to hear and decide the case on merits allowed our prayer to file refund application for amount recovered by the department in excess of the pre deposit provisons as per law, thus giving the intended benefit to the petitioner.
Disposing the petition, the Court observed that “Considering the submission of the parties and facts as appears from record that the summary order dated 18th March, 2020 is one line order without containing any detailed supporting reason and that the order of the appellate authority is also one line order dismissing the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of delay in filing the appeal without going into the merit of the appeal, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition being WPA 17530 of 2022 by setting aside the impugned order of the appellate authority dated 28th July, 2022 and remanding the matter back to the appellate authority concerned to pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law on merit of the said appeal without insisting on the issue of limitation, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the petitioner.”
The case was conceptualised and represented by Advocates Mr. Ankit Kanodia, Ms. Megha Agarwal, Mr. Jitesh Sah.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan Premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
