GST Appeal Filed Beyond 120 Days Not Maintainable: Gujarat HC Dismisses Writ Petition [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Gujarat High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration and rejection of a statutory appeal due to delay.

The case relates to Ravi Plumbing and Construction which failed to file GST returns after the first quarter of FY 2024-25. The GST department issued a show cause notice in Form GST REG-17 proposing cancellation of registration.

The petitioner did not file any reply to the notice and also did not attend the personal hearing. The proper officer passed an ex parte order in Form GST REG-19 cancelling the GST registration. The petitioner stated that he was not aware of the notice and later faced technical problems on the GST portal while trying to restore the registration.

Later, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act on 12 November 2025, nearly six months after the cancellation order. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal on 20 November 2025 as it was filed beyond the maximum allowed period of 120 days. After this, the petitioner approached the Gujarat High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that the cancellation order was passed without proper hearing and the delay happened due to technical glitches and wrong login details on the GST portal. The petitioner requested the Court to give relief by using its writ powers.

The department argued that Section 107 allows only 90 days to file appeal and an extra 30 days for condonation. Once this 120-day limit is crossed, no authority has power to condone the delay. It was also argued that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to extend limitation fixed under a special law.

The Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi observed that the delay facts were not disputed. The court explained that Section 107(4) strictly limits condonation to only 30 days beyond the initial period. After this time, the right to appeal comes to an end. The court also observed that even though Article 226 powers are wide, they cannot be used against clear legislative intent.

The High Court relied on the Supreme Court decision in Assistant Commissioner (CT) v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Ltd. explaining that writ jurisdiction cannot revive a remedy which is already time-barred. The court pointed out that reasons like portal issues and wrong credentials were not valid grounds to cross statutory limits. Taxpayers are expected to regularly check the GST portal.

The court refused to interfere with the appellate order. The writ petition was dismissed and the cancellation of GST registration and rejection of appeal remained valid.

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