High Court Condones 163-Day Delay In Filing GST Appeal To Permit Substantive Adjudication On Merits

By | August 20, 2026
0 Comment
High Court Condones 163-Day Delay In Filing GST Appeal To Permit Substantive Adjudication On Merits
Issue
Whether an inordinate delay of 163 days in filing a statutory GST appeal under Section 107—which exceeds the one-month condonable window—can be condoned in exercise of writ jurisdiction to allow deciding the substantive challenge on merits.
Facts
  • Order-in-Original: An Order-in-Original was passed against the petitioner on 15.10.2025.
  • Filing of Appeal: The petitioner filed a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act on 27.03.2026, accompanied by the requisite pre-deposit and a condonation of delay application.
  • Grounds for Delay: The petitioner cited efforts toward a rectification move and involvement in a family marriage as reasons for the delay.
  • Appellate Authority Dismissal: The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal as time-barred, noting that the 163-day delay extended beyond the statutory one-month condonable limit provided under Section 107.
  • Writ Petition: The petitioner approached the High Court seeking condonation of delay and restoration of the appeal for decision on merits.
Decision
  • Delay Condoned in Writ Jurisdiction: In favor of Assessee. Despite opposition from the Revenue and the absence of rectification records, the High Court held that it was expedient to condone the 163-day delay as the substantive appeal involved factual aspects requiring determination.
  • Restoration of Appeal: Matter remanded. The order dismissing the appeal as time-barred was set aside, and the statutory appeal was restored to the Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication on merits after affording a due hearing.
Key Takeaways
  • Merits Preferred Over Technical Dismissal: High Courts may exercise writ jurisdiction to condone delays beyond the statutory limits of Section 107 to prevent technical dismissals where substantive legal and factual disputes exist.
  • Pre-Deposit Compliance Matters: Compliance with pre-deposit requirements demonstrates bona fides when seeking equitable relief from the court for delay condonation.
  • Consistency in Judicial Approach: Where similar delays have been condoned in comparable cases to enable adjudication on merits, courts adopt a harmonious approach to uphold justice.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Atharv Enterprises
v.
Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeal)*
C.M. Poonacha, J.
WRIT PETITION NO. 106464 OF 2026 (T-RES)
AUGUST  6, 2026
Pranav Umesh Badagi, Adv. for the Petitioner. Smt. Nandini Somapur, AGA for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. The present writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
“a. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 04.07.2026 passed by Respondent No.1 in Appeal No.GST-1231/25-26/B-446 vide Annexure-D.
b. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the acknowledgement dated 07.07.2026 issued by Respondent No.1 in Appeal No.GST-1231/25-26/B-446 vide Annexure-E.
c. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent No.1, to consider and pass orders on merits in Appeal No.GST-1231/25-26/B-446 vide Annexure -B.
d. Any other appropriate Writ / order or direction as deemed fit and proper.”
2. It is the case of the petitioner that being aggrieved by the order dated 15.10.2025 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) passed under Section 73(9) read with Rule 142(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 20171, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 107 of the Act before the respondent No.1-Joint Commissioner on 27.03.2026. That the pre-deposit sum of Rs. 39,972/- was also paid. Since the appeal was filed belatedly, an application for condonation of delay was also filed.
3. The respondent No.1-Joint Commissioner/Appellate Authority vide impugned order dated 04.07.2026 (Annexure-D to the writ petition) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that the delay in filing the appeal exceeds the permissible condonation period and hence the appeal could not be entertained. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed.
4. It is forthcoming that the order-in-original (Annexure-A to the writ petition) was passed on 15.10.2025 and the appeal was filed on 27.03.2026. Accordingly, there was a delay of 163 days in filing the appeal. Under sub-section (1) of Section 107 of the Act an appeal is required to be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order. Under sub-section (4) of Section 107 of the Act, the Appellate Authority is entitled to condone the delay upto one month beyond the prescribed three months period, provided sufficient cause is made out. In the present case, the appeal is presented 43 days beyond the condonable period as contemplated under sub-section (4) of Section 107 of the Act.
5. The appellant while seeking for condonation of delay before the Appellate Authority has stated that the delay was occasioned due to the rectification order and the fact that the petitioner was busy with the marriage of her son.
6. Although learned AGA vehemently opposed the present petition and submits that no documents are produced with regard to any rectification proceedings that the petitioner has initiated, having regard to the fact that the said reason is not only the reason stated by the petitioner, it is expedient that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned.
7. This Court in a similar fact situation in the case of Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. v. Jt. Commissioner [W.A. No. 942 of 2021, dated 3-12-2021], has condoned the delay in filing of the appeal and ordered for consideration of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority. The same is being done in the present case as well due to the fact that the petitioner is contesting the levy of tax by the order-in-original (Annexure-A to the writ petition); as also due to the fact that various factual aspects are sought to be asserted in support of the said contentions.
8. Hence the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is partly allowed;
(ii) Appeal No.GST-1231/25-26/B-446 (Annexure-D to the writ petition) pending before the respondent No.1-Joint Commissioner is restored to its original file and the delay in filing of the said appeal is condoned;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent No.1-Joint Commissioner in the said appeal on 07.09.2026 at 03.00 p.m., without the requirement of any further notice being issued in this regard;
(iv) Consequent to the appearance of the petitioner, the respondent No.1 shall adjudicate the appeal on merits in accordance with law, after providing the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing;
(v) All contentions of the parties on the merits of the matter are kept open.