Karnataka High Court Rescues Assessee: Condones 60-Day Delay Beyond Statutory Limit in GST Appeal

The rigid limitation periods prescribed under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework often become a procedural bottleneck for an aggrieved assessee seeking justice. However, the constitutional courts of India have repeatedly demonstrated that substantive justice must not be sacrificed at the altar of procedural technicalities. A prime illustration of this judicial philosophy is the recent ruling by the Karnataka High Court in the landmark matter of Jaganu S/O Punnu Jadhav Vs Asssistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.

In this significant judicial intervention, the Hon'ble High Court exercised its extraordinary writ jurisdiction to condone a delay of 60 days that occurred beyond the maximum permissible statutory limit of 120 days, thereby directing the appellate authority to adjudicate the dispute strictly on its merits.

Factual Matrix of the Dispute

To comprehend the gravity of the High Court's decision, it is essential to trace the chronological sequence of events that compelled the assessee to seek judicial redressal.

  1. Initiation of Proceedings: The jurisdictional tax authorities initiated action against the assessee by issuing a Show Cause Notice (SCN) on 29.09.2023. This notice bore the reference number ACCT/ LGSTO-450/ VJP/ DRC- 01/2023-24/ B-9619.
  2. Adjudication Order: Following the SCN, the first respondent passed an adverse adjudication order against the assessee on 26.12.2023. The order was issued under the provisions of Section 73(9) of the applicable GST legislation, bearing the reference ACCT/ LGSTO-450/ VJP/ SEC-73(9) order -26AsV/ s3B/ 2023-24/ B-11547.
  3. Appellate Rejection: Aggrieved by the adjudication, the assessee attempted to challenge the tax demand. However, the appeal was filed belatedly. Consequently, the second respondent (Appellate Authority) passed an order on 30.08.2024 in Appeal No. GST-266/ 2024-25/, dismissing the assessee's plea entirely on the grounds of limitation, without delving into the actual merits of the tax dispute.