Madras HC condones 150 Days Delay in Filing GST Appeal Due to Unawareness of Order, Subject to Additional 10% Pre-Deposit [Read Order]

The Madras High Court condoned the delay of 150 days in filing the GST appeal due to the petitioner’s unawareness of the assessment order, subject to payment of an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount as Pre-Deposit.

The petitioner, Bharakath Metal Builders, filed a writ petition challenging the impugned rejection order dated 16.10.2025 passed by the respondent, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), for rejecting the appeal on the ground of limitation.

N. Sudalaimuthu, counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the assessment order was initially passed on 25.08.2024. However, due to the failure on the part of the petitioner’s accountant, the petitioner remained unaware of the order, and the appeal was filed with a delay of 150 days beyond the condonable period.

The appeal was rejected by the respondent dated 16.10.2025 on the ground that it was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The counsel for the petitioner further contended that a rectification application had been filed on 23.11.2024, which came to be rejected on 28.02.2025, and therefore, the appeal could not be filed within time.

It was also submitted that the petitioner had already paid 10% of the disputed tax amount as statutory pre-deposit and was willing to pay an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount, if directed by the Court.

R. Sureshkumar, the counsel representing the respondent, submitted that the delay may be condoned subject to the terms and request of the court to pass appropriate orders.

Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that the appeal had been made with a delay of 150 days beyond the condonable period and was consequently rejected by the respondent. The Court noted that the reason assigned by the petitioner for the failure of the accountant resulting in unawareness of the assessment order appeared to be genuine.

Accordingly, the Court condoned the delay of 150 days in filing the appeal, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount. The rejection order was set aside, and the respondent was directed to take the appeal on record and dispose of the same on merits in accordance with law.