Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.—This writ application has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:—

“(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing of the Appellate Order in form APL-02 bearing reference no. ZD100524014826Q dated 18.05.2024 along with a detailed Order bearing Memo No 529 dated 18.05.2024 (Annexure P/4 series) issued by the respondent no. 3, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “CGST Act, 2017” for short) or the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the BGST Act, 2017 for short) in Form GST APL-01 on 26.04.2024(Annexure P/3 Series), against the impugned Demand Order passed by respondent no 2, u/s 73(9) of the BGST/CGST Act, 2017 dated 27.12.2023, along with its summary order in Form DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD1012230343049, demanding a tax of Rs. 21,21,878/-, interest under Section 50 of Rs. 77,97,004, and penalty of Rs. 8,12,188/- for the tax period July 2017-March 2018 (Annexure P/2) has been rejected on the solitary ground of limitation.

(ii) For further issuance of a writ or order or direction upon the respondent number 3 to admit and accept the appeal filed by the petitioner in form GST APL-01 on 26.04.2024 (Annexure P/3Series), against the impugned Demand order dated 27.12.2023 passed by respondent no 2, as the Respondent no 3 without the proper application of mind, misinterpreting the provisions of section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act 2017 to conclude that the time limit of Four Months (including the condonable period of One month) from the date of communication of order for filing an appeal, is equivalent to 120 days and not Four Calendar Months, without hearing the appeal on merits although it was filed within the time limit prescribed under section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act,2017, has rejected this appeal at the admission stage by passing the impugned Appeal Order dated 18.05.2023 and these actions of Respondent no 3 are in violation of the principles of Natural Justice and the provisions of the section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017 and the respondent no 3 may further be directed to notify the petitioner about the acceptance of appeal and to decide the appeal on merits by issuing the appeal order in APL-04 after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner to represent their case in accordance with the scheme of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017;

(iii) For further issuance of a writ or order or direction restraining the Respondents and any other authority executing any of the directions issued by the said respondents, from taking any coercive action for recovery of the remaining amount of tax, interest and penalty demanded in terms of the impugned order dated 27.12.2023 passed by the respondent no 2 during the pendency of this writ application.

(iv) For further issuance of any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

Brief facts of the case

2. The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Patna. It is registered in the State of Bihar under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CGST Act’ or the ‘Act of 2017’) vide GSTIN No. 10AAACT5131AIZC. It is stated that the provisions of Sections of CGST Act, 2017 read along with relevant rules are at pari materia with the provisions of Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called ‘BGST Act, 2017’).

Submission on behalf of the petitioner

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a GST proceeding was initiated against the petitioner by respondent no. 2 vide show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of the BGST/CGST Act, 2017 for the tax period July 2017 to March 2018. In the show-cause notice, a direction