The High Court, exercising plenary powers under Article 226, can condone delays in filing GST appeals beyond statutory limits to prevent the denial of remedy and protect the right to livelihood under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Order(Oral)

Per: Arun Monga, J

1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction commanding respondent No.1 to condone the delay of 720 days in filing the appeal against the Order-in-Original dated 08.07.2022, passed by the Superintendent, Udaipur, whereby order for cancellation of GST registration was issued against the petitioner. The appeal against the said order was filed on 25.10.2024. However, the Appellate Authority vide order dated 15.01.2025 dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation as it does not have the power to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in filing the appeal occurred due to unavoidable and bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner. During the relevant period, the petitioner was facing acute financial hardship and severe paucity of funds, which substantially impaired their ability to effectively attend to financial and legal matters, including the filing of the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. The delay is thus occasioned by genuine and sufficient cause, and not due to any negligence or lack of diligence on the part of the petitioner.

2.1 It was further submitted that since amount of Rs.16,59,151/- remained outstanding from the buyer against invoice no.1 dated 16.03.2022¹As per application filed by petitioner before the MSME SAMADHAAN online portal before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Udaipur (annexure-6), it resulted in severe financial constraints. Petitioner has already initiated legal proceedings for recovery of the said dues under the MSME Samadhan Online Portal before the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Udaipur and now seeks to regularize its business operations by obtaining restoration of its GST registration to continue lawful business activities. Accordingly, the delay is bona fide, arising out of genuine hardship, and not attributable to any wilful negligence or malafide intent.

2.2 Owing to these circumstances, the petitioner could not take necessary steps within the prescribed period. The delay was neither intentional nor due to any negligence, but was caused solely by the genuine difficulties faced during the said period. It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the delay in filing the appeal be kindly condoned in the interest of justice.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors²2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3938, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors.³D.B. CWP 14658/2024, RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors⁴D.B. CWP 7260/2025 and RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors⁵D.B. CWP 11794/2025 argues that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the above submission and contends that the assessment order has rightly been passed, appeal is now barred by limitation.

6. Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST Act , however, considering the reasons owing to which the petitioner could not file its appeal within the stipulated time, being beyond its control, non- adjudication of appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.

7. In the judgments cited above in para 4 of preceding part of instant order, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits.

8. In the context of present case, where cancellation of GST registration results in loss