One-Day Delay Incorrectly Computed: Punjab & Haryana HC allows Writ, Orders Fresh Consideration of GST Refund Appeal [Read Order]

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the order of the First Appellate Authority which dismissed a GST refund appeal as time-barred, holding that the computation of limitation was legally flawed. The Division Bench held that the appeal had, in fact, been filed within the statutory extended period permissible under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act,2017.

The reimbursement of ₹2,94,614 paid in protest toward IGST on ocean freight under reverse charge during audit processes was the main grievance in the writ case filed by Laxmi Metal and Machines through its partner Satish Kumar Joon.

Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here

The levy itself had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd., following which the petitioner sought refund by filing Form RFD-01. The Proper Officer rejected the claim, and the Appellate Authority thereafter dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was filed one day beyond limitation.

The petitioner contended that the order-in-original passed on January 24, 2024, had been communicated on February 1, 2024, and that the statutory three-month period under Section 107(1) would therefore end on May 1, 2024, making the extended outer limit June 1, 2024. It was argued that the appeal filed on June 1, 2024, was within time and that the Appellate Authority erred in treating May 30, 2024, as the last permissible date.

The petitioner further explained that the delay in filing the appeal was due to his absence from the country and lack of communication from counsel. He mentioned that the Appellate Authority did not take note of these.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Parmod Goyal, observed that the date on which the order is communicated must be treated as Day Zero, and limitation begins on the following day. Relying on the Delhi High Court’s decision in Parmod Kumar Tomar v. Assistant Commissioner, Mundka Division, the Bench held that the approach of the Appellate Authority in including the date of communication while computing limitation was erroneous.

As a result, the High Court set aside the order-in-appeal dated June 19, 2025, and remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication on merits after granting due opportunity of hearing to the parties.

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