Delay Conedoned as Appellate Order Uploaded Under Incorrect Portal Category Caused Reasonable Omission by Assessee

By | July 23, 2026

Delay Conedoned as Appellate Order Uploaded Under Incorrect Portal Category Caused Reasonable Omission by Assessee

Issue

Whether the delay in filing a statutory GST appeal beyond the condonable period under Section 107 can be condoned when the order-in-original was uploaded under the incorrect portal tab (“Additional Notices and Orders” instead of “Notices and Orders”), preventing the assessee from accessing it in time.

Facts

  • Demand Raised: For the tax period 2021-22, an Order-in-Original was passed against the petitioner raising a demand for allegedly wrongful Input Tax Credit (ITC).

  • Incorrect Portal Upload: The tax authority uploaded the order on the GST portal under the category “Additional Notices and Orders” rather than the standard “Notices and Orders” section.

  • Accidental Discovery: The petitioner did not routinely check alternative portal categories and only learned about the existence of the adverse order accidentally at a later date.

  • System Rejection of Appeal: Upon attempting to lodge a statutory appeal online, the GST portal module rejected the submission, treating the appeal as time-barred under Section 107.

  • Writ Petition: The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking condonation of delay beyond the statutory condonable limit, attributing the delay to the Revenue’s misplacement of the order on the online portal.

  • Revenue’s Objection: The Tax Department opposed the petition, asserting that the limitation periods under Section 107 are absolute and cannot be extended.

Decision

  • Bound by Statutory Limits: The court acknowledged that while the Appellate Authority itself remains strictly bound by the statutory limitation timeline under Section 107, extraordinary circumstances warrant judicial intervention under Article 226 [Para 9].

  • Beyond Control of Assessee: The delay was directly attributable to circumstances beyond the petitioner’s control, specifically the uploading of the order under an incorrect portal tab by the Revenue [Para 9].

  • Prevention of Grave Prejudice: Denying an adjudication on merits due to an administrative or portal navigation error would cause grave prejudice to the taxpayer [Para 10].

  • Delay Condoned & Remand Directed: Following consistent judicial precedents in similar portal-related matters, the High Court condoned the delay and directed the Appellate Authority to entertain the appeal and decide it on merits [Para 10].

Key Takeaways

  • Portal Technicalities Cannot Defeat Substantive Rights: Uploading statutory orders or notices under non-standard or obscure portal tabs (“Additional Notices and Orders”) excuses delays in filing appeals.

  • Exhaustion of Section 107 via Writ Remedy: While the Section 107 Appellate Authority lacks statutory power to condone delay beyond the prescribed period, High Courts can exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to condone delays caused by portal defects or administrative misplacement.

  • Preference for Adjudication on Merits: Revenue proceedings should be resolved on substantive legal and factual merits rather than being shut out by procedural defaults originating from system navigation issues.

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Challengers Events (P.) Ltd.
v.
State of Rajasthan
Arun Monga and Maneesh Sharma, JJ.
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11525 of 2024
JULY  10, 2026
Ravi Gupta for the Petitioner. Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG, Ms. Chelsi AgarwalMs. Jaya Pathak and Sandeep Pathak for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction commanding respondents to entertain the appeal and also condone the delay and allow the filing of appeal against the impugned Order in Original, dated 25.07.2023 (Financial Years 2021-22) passed by the Office of Assistant Commissioner, Circle-H, Jaipur IV, whereby GST demand of Rs.6,55,124/- for Financial Year 2021-22, was raised on the account of Wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit by the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in filing the appeal occurred on account of the assessment order having been uploaded on the portal under the wrong category of “Additional Notices and Orders” instead of the prescribed category of “Notices and Orders”. He further contends that the petitioner, in the ordinary course, had no reason to check other categories and was under the bonafide impression that the order would be available under the correct head and further submits that the petitioner came to know about the impugned assessment order only by chance upon locating it under the wrong category, whereafter he immediately took steps to prefer the appeal but the appeal against the said orders could not per force be filed before the Appellate Authority as the online status of the appeal would reveal that the same is time-barred.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he filed the instant writ petition on 05.07.2024 against the impugned order after a delay of 226 days (factoring in the power to condone the delay of 120 days under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017).
4. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M R Traders v. UOI 2026 SCC OnLine RAJ 2115, Molana Construction Company v. Central GST Department, Rajasthan [2024]  89 GSTL 353 (Rajasthan)/2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3938, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central GST Department, Rajasthan  106 GST 181 (Rajasthan)/D.B. CWP 14658/2024, RPC PSIPL JV v. State of Rajasthan [D.B. CWP No. 7260 of 2025, dated 2-7-2025] and RPC PSIPL JV v. State of Rajasthan [D.B. CWP No. 11794 of 2025, dated 12-8-2025] argues that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by this Court.
6. Learned counsels for the respondents oppose the above submission and contends that the impugned order has rightly been passed and appeal is now barred by limitation.
7. Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act, 2017, however, considering the reasons owing to which the petitioner could not submit its appeal within the stipulated time, being beyond its control, nonadjudication of appeal on merits would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.
8. In the judgments cited above, this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on merits.
9. In the premise, following the consistent view as already taken by this Court, ibid, we allow the present writ petition to the extent of condoning the delay in filing of the appeal by the petitioner.
10. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority shall now entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the same on merits, provided the same is filed within 30 days of the instant order being uploaded on the website of this court.
11. Stay petition and all pending application also stand disposed of.