Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand *  DGFT extends export obligation period for advance authorisations & EPCG authorisations till August 31 *  The e-way bill system has been updated in 2026 with revised validity periods and enhanced verification mechanisms *  MSME iron and steel exporters get interest subvention relief extension *  DGFT Activates Online Post Export EPCG Module: Streamlines Issuance, Re-Issuance & Utilisation Of Duty Credit Scrips *  Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court
Subject News *  Andhra Pradesh HC quashes multi-year GST assessment *  No liability of TCS in GST on e-commerce operator not collecting consideration: Karnataka HC *  GST Refund Can’t Be Retained When Tax Was Never Payable: Uttarakhand High Court *  Major Procedural Relief for Taxpayers and GST Professionals in Appeal Filing Process: GSTAT Portal Enabled For Document Upload & Checklist Access Prior To Court Fee Payment *  Filing of Pending GSTR-3B Return Results in Withdrawal of GST Assessment: Andhra Pradesh HC *  Karnataka High Court :No liability of TCS in GST on e-commerce operator not collecting consideration *  DGFT Restricts Export of High-Grade Baryte; Grade CDW Continues Under Free Export Category *  Karnataka HC Upholds Banks' CENVAT Credit on DICGC Insurance Premium. *  CBIC Issues Circular for Smooth Implementation of Safeguard Duty Exemptions on Steel Flat Products *  Assessee Can’t Be Left Remediless Due To Improper Communication Of GST Order: Rajasthan High Court Condones Delay *  Bakery Products Sold Without Preparation Are ‘Goods’, While Pizzas Prepared at Outlet Qualify as ‘Restaurant Service’: AAR *  Jharkhand HC Quashes GST ITC Reversal Order Passed Solely Due to Delayed GSTR-3B Filing. *  Reimbursable Expenses Collected By CHA Can’t Be Subjected To Service Tax: CESTAT *  Booking Air Tickets Not Taxable Under ‘Tour Operator’ Service: CESTAT *  Automatic Soap Dispenser Not Classifiable as Toiletry Spray Since it Dispenses Foam , Not Spray : CESTAT  *  No Cenvat Credit Admissible Where Amount Paid Was Not Towards CVD Under Advance Licence Scheme: CESTAT *  Karnataka HC Restores GST Registration After Taxpayer Misses Proceedings Due To Inaccessible Paid Email Account *  Orissa HC Quashes GST Proceedings, Says Reversed ITC Cannot Be Demanded Again Without Credit *  Adjudication order sets aside on the basis that adjudicating Authority failed to address a fundamental jurisdictional objection relating to denial of ISD credit : Himachal Pradesh HC *  The High Court quashed revision notices issued to assessee, ruling that a Commissioner cannot override an Assessing Officer’s (AO) decision merely to seek a different outcome. *  No GST Registration Required for Solar Power Supplier Engaged Exclusively in Exempt Electricity Supply : AAR   *  Coaching for School Students Taxable at 18% GST as ‘Supplementary Education’ : AAR *  GST registration cancellation quashed as vague SCN with bald fraud allegation without particulars alleged: HC *  Anti-Dumping Duty Demand Unsustainable Without Proof of Misdeclaration of Country of Origin; Unverified Electronic Evidence Can’t Override Valid Certificate: CESTAT *  GST  Freezing of Cash Credit Accounts Illegal: Bombay High Court *  Patna High Court Upholds GST Summons in Fake ITC Probe; Dismisses Writ Challenging Multiple Notices, Imposes Rs. 25K Cost *  Bombay High Court quashes 1,524crore GST demand against Tata Sons *  The Bombay High Court ruled that affiliation fees collected by statutory universities from colleges are statutory levies, not consideration for services, and thus are not subject to GST. *  Karnataka HC Quashes GST Demand, Orders Fresh Adjudication with 10% Pre-Deposit Condition *  High Court Orders To Revive GST Number Cancelled During All-India Fake GST Registration Drive  

Comments
Print   |    |  Comment

GST update /2026-27/0017

M/s Ramdev Builders vs State of Rajasthan & Ors
Hon’ble Court: HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Case Title: M/s Ramdev Builders vs State of Rajasthan & Ors
Petition No. & Citation: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4504/2026 [2026:RJ-JD:17557-DB]
Date of Order:16.04.2026
Outcome: Writ Petition partly allowed – Delay condoned and appeal directed to be heard on merits

Brief Facts of the Case
The petitioner, M/s Ramdev Builders, was subjected to GST demand orders for the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 on account of alleged excess availment and utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The Department raised demands along with consequential proceedings including attachment.
The petitioner failed to file an appeal within the prescribed limitation period under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 due to extraordinary personal circumstances, including multiple deaths in the family, causing severe mental distress and financial hardship. Consequently, the appeal became time-barred, and the petitioner approached the High Court seeking condonation of delay.

Relevant Section / Rule / Notification
• Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017

Question before Hon’ble Court
• Whether delay in filing appeal can be condoned in writ jurisdiction?
•   Whether genuine hardship constitutes sufficient cause for delay?

Brief Arguments by Petitioner
  1. Delay due to unavoidable circumstances
The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to circumstances beyond their control. Multiple deaths in the family between 2019 and 2025 caused severe emotional and financial distress. These events disrupted normal business functioning and decision-making. As a result, the petitioner was unable to file the appeal within the prescribed time.
  1. No negligence or intention to delay
The petitioner contended that the continuous family losses cannot be treated as an ordinary delay. The prolonged grief, depression, and financial hardship made it impossible to take timely legal action. The delay was neither intentional nor due to negligence but caused by genuine incapacity. Due to these circumstances, the petitioner could not arrange legal assistance or comply with appeal requirements. Denial of condonation would result in grave injustice by upholding an order on mere technical grounds instead of merits.
 
  1. Reliance on judicial precedents
The petitioner relied on judicial precedents, including M/s M R Traders v. Union of India (2026 SCC OnLine Raj 2115) and M/s Molana Construction Company v. CGST Department (2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3938), to contend that where delay in filing appeal occurs due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, the same constitutes “sufficient cause”. Accordingly, it was argued that in such genuine cases, the delay deserves to be condoned and the appeal should be directed to be decided on merits in the interest of substantial justice.

Brief Arguments by Respondent
The Revenue contended that the appeal was rightly rejected as time-barred and no further condonation is permissible under GST law.

Findings and Judgment
  1.  Denial of appeal would cause injustice
The Court held that although the Appellate Authority is bound by limitation under Section 107, the delay in filing the appeal was due to circumstances beyond the petitioner’s control, and denying adjudication on merits would result in serious injustice and prejudice.
  1. Appeal directed to be decided on merits
 The Appellate Authority is directed to now entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the same on merits


This is solely for educational purpose:-

Opinion

Author’s Comment
Situations involving delay in filing appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) are extremely common in practical GST litigation. In many cases, taxpayers fail to file appeals within the prescribed limitation period due to genuine and unavoidable reasons such as lack of regular access to the GST portal, medical emergencies, deaths in the family, financial crises, family disputes, or other personal hardships. Quite often, the assessee may not even become aware of the order uploaded on the portal within time. However, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Singh Enterprises v. CCE [Appeal (Civil) no. 5949 of 2007] and Assistant Commissioner v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Ltd. [Appeal (Civil) No. 2413 of 2020], the appellate authorities are bound by the statutory provisions and cannot condone delay beyond the additional period prescribed under the statute, i.e., beyond 30 days. As a result, even genuine taxpayers are often denied an opportunity of hearing due to circumstances beyond their control. In this background, the present judgment serves as a ray of hope for taxpayers facing genuine hardship. The decision reiterates that substantial justice should not be defeated merely on technical grounds, particularly where the delay is bona fide and sufficiently explained.
It is also pertinent to note that during the initial years of GST implementation, the authorities were adopting a comparatively liberal approach in accepting time-barred appeals at the Commissioner (Appeals) stage. However, such liberal interpretation is no longer being followed. Consequently, in practical scenarios, a large number of appeals are being rejected solely on the ground of limitation without adjudication on merits. In our view, to reduce unnecessary litigation and prevent additional burden on the High Courts arising solely from time-barred appeals, the Government should consider introducing a one-time amnesty scheme. Such a scheme may permit taxpayers to file delayed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) within a specified temporary window, with corresponding condonation of delay for that limited period. This would promote substantial justice and provide relief to genuine taxpayers who could not avail the appellate remedy within time due to unavoidable circumstances.
 

Post a Comment
Department News


Query
 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com