Illness of Accountant & Closure of Business are ‘Lame Excuses’ to Condone Delay in GST Appeal: Gujarat HC [Read Order]
The High Court reaffirmed that the Appellate Authority cannot condone delay beyond the statutory limit of one month as prescribed under Section 107(4) of the GST Act.
![Illness of Accountant & Closure of Business are ‘Lame Excuses’ to Condone Delay in GST Appeal: Gujarat HC [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/12/29/2115655-lame-excuses-condone-delay-gst-appeal-gujarat-hc.webp "Illness of Accountant & Closure of Business are ‘Lame Excuses’ to Condone Delay in GST Appeal: Gujarat HC [Read Order]")
The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a writ petition challenging an Goods and Services Tax (GST) order in appeal which rejected condonation of delay in an appeal filed beyond the statutorily permissible period. The High Court commented that the reasons cited for the delay, such as illness of an accountant and the closure of business were "lame excuses" not warranting...
The Gujarat High Court recently dismissed a writ petition challenging an Goods and Services Tax (GST) order in appeal which rejected condonation of delay in an appeal filed beyond the statutorily permissible period.
The High Court commented that the reasons cited for the delay, such as illness of an accountant and the closure of business were "lame excuses" not warranting discretionary jurisdiction from the High Court to override the legislation regarding limitation periods under the GST framework.
The facts follow the issuance of a show-cause notice under Section 73 of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017 issued to the petitioner, M/s Tapi Ready Plast on December 27, 2023 and pertaining to the Financial Year 2018-19.
The revenue alleged that the petitioner had under-declared their tax liability on outward supplies upon reconciliation of data with GSTR-09. Subsequently, the Adjudicating Authority passed an Order-in-Original on February 28, 2024.
Subsequently, the petitioner preferred a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act on August 13, 2024, but with a delay of 2 months and 16 days beyond the statutorily permissible period of three months for filing appeal, thus having filed the appeal with a delay of 5 months and 16 days aggregately. The Appellate Authority thus rejected the appeal on April 23, 2025 citing its inability to condone delay beyond the one-month extension period as permissible by the statute.
In this petition, Jay Dhotre appeared for the petitioner and referred to the Calcutta High Court decision in S.K. Chakraborty & Sons. v. Union of India & Ors. (2023) to argue that the Limitation Act, 1963 granted discretion to the appellate authority to condone such delays.
The counsel further submitted that the petitioner entity’s accountant had been sick and also that all of the business partners lost touch since the closure of business and as such could not file the appeal within the prescribed period.
Meanwhile Assistant Government Pleader Shrunjal Shah for the State cited Assistant Commissioner of (CT) LTU, Kakinada & Ors. vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) to contend that Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked to maintain an appeal beyond the maximum period prescribed in the GST Act.
The Division Bench comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi examined the statutory scheme of Section 107 of the GST Act.
Section 107 . Appeals to Appellate Authority.-
(1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person.
(2) xxx xxx
(3) xxx xxx
(4) The Appellate Authority may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of three months or six months, as the case may be, allow it to be presented within a further period of one month.”
The Court observed that the Appellate Authority has no power to condone delay beyond the one-month grace period provided under Section 107(4). Reference was made to the Supreme Court decision in Assistant Commissioner of (CT) LTU, Kakinada & Ors. vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) where it was categorically held that the Appellate Authority has no power to condone the delay, if an appeal is preferred after the aggregate period.
The Division Bench further referred to the Supreme Court ruling in M/s. Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur (2007) while remarking that accepting "lame excuses" like the illness of an accountant would render the legislative scheme otiose.
Consequently, the High Court refused to set aside the Appellate Authority's order and dismissed the writ petition.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
