The Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal (MSTT), Mumbai, has condoned a substantial delay of 1,394 days in filing appeals by M/s. Sudha Metal International, accepting the explanation that the assessee’s Chartered Accountant had undertaken a religious “Diksha”, which contributed to the delay.
The Bench of M.S. Pathan (Judicial Member) and S.P. Dani (Technical Member) examined the facts in detail. The Tribunal took note of The documents and evidence placed on record by the appellant. Medical records indicating health issues of the appellant. The decline in the appellant’s business operations. The fact that the appellant was single-handedly managing the business
However, the Tribunal also observed that the appellant could have engaged another professional to avoid such a prolonged delay and could not entirely shift responsibility to their Chartered Accountant.
The Tribunal condoned the delay but imposed costs Rs. 50,000 as cost in the MVAT appeal; Rs. 10,000 as cost in the CST appeal; and total cost of ₹60,000, to be deposited within one month as a condition precedent
The case arose from Miscellaneous Application Nos. 91 and 92 of 2025, pertaining to appeals against orders dated February 26, 2021 for the assessment year 2015–16. As per statutory requirements, the appeals were to be filed within two months; however, they were eventually filed only on March 20, 2025, resulting in a delay of nearly four years.
The assessee explained that their regular Chartered Accountant had undertaken Diksha, a spiritual vow in Jainism requiring prolonged religious commitment, which led to the inability to initiate the appeal process in time. The assessee also submitted that they were fully reliant on the said professional and were unaware of the duration and implications of such a commitment.
The appellant argued that the delay was unintentional and caused by circumstances beyond their control, emphasizing that all relevant documents were available for adjudication on merits.
On the other hand, the Revenue opposed the condonation, contending that the delay was excessively long. It was argued that even after accounting for the COVID-19 exclusion period, the delay still exceeded 1,000 days, and the reasons cited were insufficient.
The Bench comprising Judicial Member Shri M.S. Pathan and Technical Member Shri S.P. Dani examined the facts in detail. The Tribunal took note of the documents and evidence placed on record by the appellant. Medical records indicating health issues of the appellant. The decline in the appellant’s business operations. The fact that the appellant was single-handedly managing the business
However, the Tribunal also observed that the appellant could have engaged another professional to avoid such a prolonged delay and could not entirely shift responsibility to their Chartered Accountant.
Only upon compliance would the appeals be processed for registration.
Case Details
Case Title: M/s. Sudha Metal International Versus The State of Maharashtra
Case No.: MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NOS. 91 AND 92 OF 2025
Date: 09.03.2026
Read More: JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : APRIL 11, 2026
