The Allahabad High Court held that taxing statutes like the GST Act embody a comprehensive framework with specific limitation provisions tailored to expedite the resolution of tax-related matters and section 107 of the GST Act, operates as a complete code in itself, explicitly delineating limitation periods for filing appeals and implicitly excluding the application of general limitation provisions such as Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Brief Facts:
The present writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, wherein, the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the ground of limitation, as the same was filed approximately 66 days beyond the date of limitation.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the appeal under Section 107 of the Act was filed beyond time. However, counsel on behalf of the petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Chakraborty & sons vs. Union of India and others to argue that Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 would be attracted as Section 107 of the Act does not expressly or impliedly exclude the attraction of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Observations of the court:
The court referred to the decision of the court in the case of M/s Abhishek Trading Corporation vs. Commissioner (Appeals) and another, wherein it was held that section 107 of the Act specifically provides for the limitation and in the absence of any clause condoning the delay by showing sufficient cause after the prescribed period, there is complete exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly, one cannot apply Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to the aforesaid provision. Further, it referred to the case of Penuel Nexus Pvt. Ltd. -v- The Additional Commissioner Headquarters (Appeals) and Ors., wherein it was held that the GST Act is a special statute and a self-contained code by itself and hence, Limitation Act will not apply.
The court stated that it is clear that the appellate authority can only allow an extension of a period of one month as provided in sub-section (4) of Section 107 of the Act. In the present case, the appeal was filed approximately 66 days subsequent to the expiry of one month that was condonable under Section 107(4) of the Act and therefore, the appellate authority could not have condoned the delay even if sufficient cause was made out.
Further, the court stated that in analyzing the conflicting interpretations concerning the exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act as far as Section 107 of the GST Act is concerned, it is essential to consider the rationale behind the exclusion of the Limitation Act in certain special statues, particularly in the context of taxation. Tax laws are often characterized by strict procedural requirements and time-bound deadlines, reflecting the need for expeditious resolution of tax disputes to ensure revenue certainty and fiscal stability.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition.
Case Title: M/S Yadav Steels Having Office vs Additional Commissioner and Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shekhar B. Saraf
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. – 975 of 2023
Advocate for the Petitioner: Suresh Chandra Pandey, Saurabh Pandey
Advocate for the Respondent: C.S.C.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
