High Court rules it cannot condone delays beyond statutory limits in GST appeals, reinforcing legislative intent.
In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court has underscored the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in filing appeals under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017. The Division Bench, comprising Justices A.S. Supehia and Pranav Trivedi, dismissed a writ petition filed by Harsh Deepk Shah, who sought to challenge the rejection of his appeal due to a delay of six days beyond the maximum condonable period of 120 days.
The petitioner, Harsh Deepk Shah, had initially challenged the Order-in-Original dated 24.04.2024, which was subsequently upheld by the Order-in-Appeal dated 30.05.2025. However, the appeal was filed six days late, beyond the permissible 120-day period, including the discretionary one-month extension, which led to its rejection by the appellate authority.
The court held that under Section 107 of the GST Act, the appellate authority is empowered to allow an appeal to be filed within a maximum period of 120 days, including a three-month initial period and a possible one-month extension for sufficient cause. Beyond this, the appellate authority lacks the power to condone any further delay.
Relying on various Supreme Court precedents, including Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020), the court reiterated that while the High Court possesses wide jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, it cannot disregard the legislative intent by condoning delays beyond the statutory limits set by special legislation like the GST Act. The court emphasized that doing so would render the legislative scheme and its intent otiose.
The court also addressed the petitioner's attempt to challenge the Order-in-Original directly, noting that once an alternative remedy in the form of an appeal has been availed, the High Court cannot revisit the merits of the original order under Article 226.
In dismissing the petition, the court reinforced the principle that statutory provisions concerning limitation periods are binding, and deviations cannot be permitted based on procedural leniency. This decision is expected to have significant implications for similar cases, ensuring adherence to procedural timelines prescribed by tax laws.
Bottom Line:
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Appeal against Order-in-Original rejected due to delay beyond prescribed limitation period - High Court lacks jurisdiction under Article 226 to condone delay beyond statutory limitation period.
Statutory provision(s): Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 107, Constitution of India, 1950 Article 226
Harsh Deepk Shah v. Union of India, (Gujarat)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2828420
