Writ Not Maintainable if Appeal Filed Beyond Maximum Statutory Period: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court ruled that a taxpayer cannot invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court if they have failed to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act within the maximum time limit specified by the statute.
Key Points of the Judicial Ruling
- Statutory Time Bar is Absolute: The court held that the time limit provided under Section 107 of the CGST Act for filing an appeal—which includes a standard period and a further condonable period—is a complete code in itself. If the appeal is filed beyond the maximum period specified, the delay cannot be condoned, and the appellate authority has no power to entertain it.
- No Writ Remedy for Time-Barred Appeal: Once the maximum statutory time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the High Court generally will not use its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to revive the appeal or circumvent the statutory time bar. Allowing a writ petition in such a scenario would amount to rendering the time limits prescribed by the Parliament null and void.
- Requirement for Bona Fide Circumstances: While writ jurisdiction is a constitutional remedy, the court emphasized that it can only be exercised in rare, exceptional cases where there is a gross miscarriage of justice or patent illegality, but not merely to overcome the taxpayer’s failure to adhere to the explicit and binding procedural time limits set by the law.