The Delhi High Court condoned delay in filing certified copy of GST order extending benefit of online filing subject to payment of Rs. 25,000.
The bench Justice Prathiba M. Singh Justice and Justice Amit Sharma has observed that merely because the physical submission of the appeal and the order was much later, when the online filing was within the prescribed time, cannot deprive the Petitioner of hearing on merits. In most Courts and Tribunals, online filing and electronic filing is now prescribed mode and the Courts are moving towards technologically advanced systems. It would be retrograde to opine that online filing, which was complete in all respects, including electronic copy of the order, is not valid filing.
The petitioner/assessee before the Assistant Commissioner CGST claiming the accumulated input credit for the months of May, 2019 to December, 2019 and January, 2020 to May, 2020. These refund applications were disposed of by the Proper Officer.
The appeals against the respective Orders in Original were rejected by the Additional Commissioner, CGST, on the ground of being barred by limitation. The Additional Commissioner considered the date of physical filing as the official filing date, disregarding the date of online filing, which was within the prescribed limitation period.
The petitioner contended that Appellate Authority has erred in dismissing the application on the grounds of delay were filed within the prescribed limitation period. Consequently, the key question to be determined is whether the appeals were indeed filed within the limitation period in accordance with the relevant sections and rules or not?
The refund applications were filed under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Order in Original was passed under Section 54(7) of the CGST Act, 2017. The orders are appealable to the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of CGST Act, 2017.
As per pre-amended Rule 108 of CGST Rules, the appeal could be filed either electronically or otherwise. Upon filing of the appeal, along with relevant documents, provisional acknowledgement was to be issued. Thereafter, under Rule 108(3) of CGST Rules, certified copy of the decision could be filed within seven days of the filing of the appeal, upon which the final acknowledgement indicating the appeal no. would be issued for all practical purposes. However, subject to the condition that certified copy is filed within seven days, the date of issuance of provisional acknowledgement was the date of filing of the appeal.
The court held that since there has been a substantial delay in the physical filing, though, the Court is extending the benefit of online filing to the Petitioner, let a lump sum amount of Rs.25,000/- be deposited as costs by the Petitioner with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee subject to which the Appellate Authority shall consider the appeals.
Case Details
Case Title: Chegg India Pvt Ltd Versus Union Of India & Ors.
Case No.: W.P.(C) 1062/2024 & CM APPL. 4433/2024
Date: 20/12/2024
Counsel For Petitioner: Yogendra Aldak
Counsel For Respondent: Aditya Singla
