Delay in Filing GST Appeal Condoned on Genuine Grounds by Madras High Court

Case Summary

• Case Title: Tvl. Pasura Crop Care Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Appeal) (GST), Salem

• Court Name: High Court of Judicature at Madras

• Petition No.: W.P. No.11682 of 2025

• Relevant Section: Section 161 of TNGST Act, 2017; Limitation provisions under GST Appeal Rules

• Category of Dispute: GST Appeal – Delay in Filing

• Date of Judgement: 02.04.2025

• Relevant Law: Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

Facts of the Case

(Ref: Paragraphs 3 to 4)

1. The petitioner was assessed for the year 2019–2020 and received a demand for tax, interest, and penalty under an order dated 14.08.2024.

2. Instead of appealing, the petitioner filed a rectification petition under Section 161 of the TNGST Act, which was rejected on 22.02.2025.

3. Subsequently, an appeal was filed with the first respondent (Appellate Authority) on 03.03.2025 with a delay of 108 days.

4. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal solely on the ground of delay vide order dated 13.03.2025.

Question(s) in Consideration

(Ref: Paragraphs 4 to 6)

• Whether the delay of 108 days in filing the appeal can be condoned on the ground that the petitioner first opted for a rectification route under a bonafide belief?

• Whether the appellate authority was justified in rejecting the appeal without considering the explanation for delay?

Observation of Court

(Ref: Paragraphs 8 to 9)

1. The Court acknowledged that nothing legally prevented the petitioner from filing an appeal immediately after assessment.

2. However, the petitioner’s explanation that they pursued rectification under a bonafide impression was accepted as genuine.

3. Since 10% of the disputed tax had already been paid and the petitioner offered to deposit another 5%, the Court found it appropriate to allow the condonation.

Judgement of the Court

(Ref: Paragraph 9)

1. The impugned appellate rejection order dated 13.03.2025 was quashed.

2. The delay of 108 days in filing the appeal was condoned subject to an additional 5% tax deposit.

3. The appellate authority was directed to entertain the appeal and dispose it on merits after affording due opportunity.

🧵 Between Fine Lines

• Appeals filed with delay can be condoned if the reasons are genuine and supported with good faith conduct.

• Recourse to rectification under Section 161 does not bar subsequent appeal.

• Payment of 10% pre-deposit and further 5% helped strengthen the equity of the petitioner.

• Courts may exercise writ jurisdiction to remedy rejection based on procedural rigidity.

• Procedural lapses, when not motivated by mala fide intent, may be relaxed in the interest of justice.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”