Pinkesh Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2155 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2940 of 2023
     ======================================================

Pinkesh Kumar Singh having its registered office at Dumrahar Bazar, Mairitar, Dumrahar, Guthani, Siwan- 841435 through its Proprietor namely Pinkesh Kumar Singh, Male, aged about 34 years, Son of Sheshnath Singh, Resident of Vill- Mohiuddinpur, P.S.- Siwan Mufassil, District- Siwan 841226

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary of Bihar Patna.

2. The Principal Secertary cum Commissioner, Department of State Taxes, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Special Commissioner of State Taxes, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Additional Commissioner of State Taxes, (Appeal) Siwan.

5. The Joint Commissioner of State Taxes, Siwan.

6. The Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Siwan.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate Mr. Raju Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Prasad, GP-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 05-05-2023 The petitioner is aggrieved by the dismissal of a

appeal by the first Appellate Authority on the ground of non-

production of the certified copy. The dismissal was also on

account of the Rules 108(3) of the Central Goods and Services

Tax Rules, 2017 providing for a certified copy to be filed within

seven days from the date of institution of the appeal. The

appellant failed to do that and hence the Appellate Authority

rejected the appeal on that ground.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2940 of 2023 dt.05-05-2023

We have already held that it will be harsh on the

assessee, if the Appellate Authority dismisses the appeal merely

for reason of non-production of the certified copy though the

rule provides for it. It is an accepted fact that now the orders are

auto-populated and the Department uploads such orders on the

portal. The necessity and requirement of the certified copy,

hence pales into insignificance.

The learned Government Advocate also fairly puts

forth an amendment dated 26.12.2022 brought in by the Union

of India to the corresponding rules under the CGST Act,

wherein sub-rule (3) of rule 108 has been substituted which

specifically provides that if the decision or order appealed

against is uploaded on the common portal, a self attested copy

of the decision or order would suffice.

The learned Government Advocate also points out

that the present appeal was rejected after the Rule was amended.

Finding that the amendment to the Rule is a

clarificatory one, we are of the opinion that the appeal has to be

considered on merits. The impugned order is set aside only on

the technical reason as stated above and the appeal is directed to

be restored to the files of the Appellate Authority who shall

consider afresh the issues raised on merits after issuing notice Patna High Court CWJC No.2940 of 2023 dt.05-05-2023

and affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the

petitioner.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ

petition stands allowed.

                                               (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)


                                                       ( Rajiv Roy, J)
aditya/sunil
AFR/NAFR                  NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date            09.05.2023.
Transmission Date