High Court Condones 84-Day GST Appeal Delay on Genuine

High Court Condones 84-Day GST Appeal Delay on Genuine Medical Grounds and Restores Matter

Issue

Whether the High Court under Article 226 can condone an 84-day delay beyond the statutory condonable period under Section 107 of the CGST/KGST Act and restore an appeal dismissed as time-barred when the delay was caused by genuine medical ailments.

Facts

Assessment Order: The petitioner was aggrieved by an assessment order passed by respondent No. 1, which was communicated in December 2023.
Filing of Statutory Appeal: The petitioner filed a statutory appeal before respondent No. 2 in July 2024.
Delay in Filing: The appeal was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period and exceeded the statutory condonable limit under Section 107 by 84 days.
Dismissal as Time-Barred: The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of being barred by limitation.
Invocation of Writ Jurisdiction: The petitioner filed a writ petition explaining that the delay was due to medical ailments and bed rest, substantiated by an affidavit and medical certificate.

Decision

Sufficient Cause Established: The High Court observed that the delay occurred due to medical reasons, which were sufficiently substantiated by medical documents on record.
Opportunity to Prosecute Remedy: Since various substantive factual aspects were raised in the appeal requiring consideration, it was expedient in the interest of justice to grant the petitioner an opportunity to prosecute the statutory remedy on merits.
Dismissal Set Aside: The order of the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal as time-barred was set aside.
Appeal Restored: The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the appeal was restored to the file of the Appellate Authority for adjudication on merits after affording an adequate hearing.
Contentions Kept Open: All rival contentions on the merits of the case were kept open for the appellate authority to decide.

Key Takeaways

Substantive Justice Over Technicalities: Where delay beyond the statutory period is caused by genuine, unpreventable medical reasons supported by evidence, courts may exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction to prevent injustice.
Restoration for Merits Adjudication: Courts prefer deciding tax disputes on substantive merits rather than rejecting them at the threshold on technical limitation grounds.
Evidentiary Basis Essential: To seek equitable relief for delayed filings, taxpayers must substantiate the cause with tangible proof such as medical certificates and supporting affidavits.

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

Sunrise Crop Science

Commercial Tax Officer

C.M. Poonacha, J.

WRIT PETITION NO. 103110 OF 2026 (T-RES)

SEPTEMBER 1, 2026

H.R. Kambiyavar, Adv. for the Petitioner. Smt. Nandini Somapur, AGA and Girish Hulmani, Adv. for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. The present writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:

“i.

Issue Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of Certiorari quashing the Impguned Order bearing Appeal No.GST-413/2024-25 ARN NO.AD290724007385X ORDER DTD 18/10/2025, vide Annexure-B passed by respondent No.2.

ii.

Pass such other Order or further Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 16.12.2023 (Annexure-A to the writ petiton) passed under Section 73(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017¹ by respondent No.1-Commercial Tax Officer² the petitioner preferred an appeal [Appeal No.GST-413/2024-25 ARN No.290724007385X] under Section 107 of the Act before respondent No.2-Joint Commissioner. The said appeal was filed on 09.07.2024 i.e., after 206 days of the order dated 16.12.2023.

3. It is forthcoming from the record that the said order dated 16.12.2023 was communicated to the petitioner on 26.12.2023. The appeal under Section 107(1) of the Act is to be filed within three months from the date of communication of the order. Further Section 107(4) of the Act empowers the Appellate Authority to condone the delay upto the period of one month beyond the period of three months, provided satisfactory reasons are made out.

4. Accordingly, it is clear that the appeal filed by the petitioner has been filed 84 days after the period as contemplated under Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (4) of Section 107 of the Act. Hence, the Joint Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 18.10.2025 (Annexure-B to the writ petition) dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in preferring the appeal before the Joint Commissioner was due to the fact that the petitioner was suffering from medical ailments and was advised bed rest. An additional affidavit of the petitioner is also filed setting out the said reasons and the medical certificate is also annexed along with the said affidavit.

6. Having regard to the reason for the delay in filing the appeal by the petitioner; as also since various factual aspects are sought to be asserted in the appeal filed by the petitioner; keeping in mind the judgment of this Court in the case of Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax [W.P. No.104931 of 2026, dated 09.07.2026], NC:2026:KHC-D:272, it is expedient that the petitioner be afforded another opportunity to prosecute the appeal before the Appellate Authority.

7. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(i)

The writ petition is partly allowed;

(ii)

The order dated 18.10.2025 passed in Appeal No.GST-413/2024-25 ARN No.AD290724007385X by respondent No.2-Joint Commissioner (Annexure-B to the writ petition) is set aside; the delay in filing the said appeal before the respondent No.2 is hereby condoned and the said appeal is restored to its file;

(iii)

The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2-Joint Commissioner in the said appeal on 02.11.2026 at 11.00 a.m., without requirement of any further notice being issued in this regard;

(iv)

Consequent to the appearance of the petitioner, the respondent No.2-Joint Commissioner shall adjudicate the appeal 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.