M/s. Sanyukta Bhattacharjee vs. Union of India [2024 (5) TMI 315]

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the present case has condone the delay beyond the prescribed period of limitation under Section 107(4) of the WBGST Act in filing of appeal.

The Petitioner had failed to lodge an appeal within the statutory 90-day window, including the additional one-month extension. On the basis that the appeal was filed beyond the permissible period, the appellate authority dismissed it. However, the Calcutta High Court intervened, instructing the appellate authority to invoke Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, thereby adjudicating the appeal on its merits.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 elucidates that an appeal can be accepted after the stipulated timeframe if the appellant can demonstrate to the court a valid reason for the delay in filing the appeal. The Division Bench of Hon’ble Calcuttaa High Court in the case of S.K. Chakraborty & Sons had observed that Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act provides that Section 5 shall be applicable unless expressly excluded by a special law and since Section 107 of CGST Act does not have any non obstante clause to make Section 29(2) non-applicable, it is improper to read an implied exclusion thereof.

W&B Comments: Several High Courts, including the Allahabad High Court in M/s Yadav Steels, argue that the GST Law, being a special statute it is implied that the GST Law excludes Limitation Act. The Hon’ble Calcuttaa High Court while taking Yadav Steels into consideration, relied on Hon’ble Supreme Court in Superintending Engineer/Dehar Power House Circle Bhakra Beas Management Board (PW) Slapper. This decision ensures that taxpayers have the opportunity to have their appeals heard and decided on merits, despite procedu

Dated: June 10, 2024

Subscribe to our


Subscription Form