Order Date – 06 February 2024

Parties: Ravin Sachdev Proprietor of M/s Seams Vs Union of India and ANR.

Facts –

• The Petitioner, Ravin Sachdev Proprietor of M/s Seams, made an application seeking refund on 27.06.2022. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the same by order dated 25.08.2022. The statutory period of filing an appeal against the order was three months.
• Petitioner filed an appeal thereto through the online portal on 22.11.2022, within the period of three months. However the same has rejected on the limited ground of delay.

Issue –

• Whether the appeal filed with a delay of two months can be condoned?

Order –

• The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that, appellant, on 26.11.2022 i.e. within five days of the filing of the appeal through the online portal, sent the hardcopy of the order appealed against by post to the Office of Commissioner of Central Tax. Petitioner subsequently learnt that the hardcopy of the original order was forwarded to the Department of GST-I instead of GST-II.
• Action of the petitioner was clearly bonafide and the error was not of a nature that could have led to the order rejecting the appeal solely on the ground of limitation. Had the petitioner been informed immediately on the receipt by GST-I, petitioner would have rectified the error immediately, however, as per the communication placed on record by the petitioner, petitioner was informed by the officers of GST-I about the incorrect filing and immediately thereafter, petitioner took the remedial steps.
• Since the action of the petitioner is bonafide and petitioner appears to be diligently prosecuting the appeal, the court was of the view that there is no delay attributable to the petitioner in filing of the appeal. Consequently, held that the appeal has been filed within time. Even if there was some delay in filing the appeal, the delay appears to be bonafide.
• The writ petition allowed.