Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sonex Marmo Grani Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:50392-Db) on 21 November, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:50392-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3711/2025
Sonex Marmo Grani Pvt. Ltd., Nh-8, Amberi, Sukher, Udaipur
Through Its Director Manish Soni Son Of Sh. Dilip Kumar Soni
Age 43 Years R/o Nh-8, Amberi, Sukher, Udaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Additional Secretary To The
Government Of India, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of
Revenue, 14, Hudco, Vishala Building, B-Wing, 6Th Floor,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110 066.
2. The Joint Commissioner (Appellate Authority), State Tax,
State Goods And Service Tax Department, Machla Magra,
Patel Circle, Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Surbhi Trivedi for
Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI
Order
21/11/2025
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking setting
aside of the Order-in-Appeal dated 12.11.2024 and
consequential summary of demand dated 12.11.2024.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed solely on the
ground of delay, and none of the grounds raised in the appeal
were considered, causing grave prejudice to the petitioner. It has
been submitted that the petitioner director is not adequately
educated and lacks the requisite technical competence to operate
(Uploaded on 28/11/2025 at 11:29:47 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50392-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-3711/2025]
a computer or to comprehend the complexities of the online filing
system, including the procedural requirements pertaining to GST
compliance. Therefore, he engaged the services of an accountant
to carry out such compliances on his behalf. The petitioner placed
complete trust and reliance upon the said accountant for ensuring
timely and proper compliance with all legal and statutory
requirements, including those under the GST laws. However,
during the relevant period, the said accountant neither informed
the petitioner about the requirement of online filing of GST returns
nor filed the same on their own accord and left the services of the
petitioner long back and business operations were also closed
down due to covid. As a result of this omission and lack of
communication, the GST returns for a continuous period of 1000
days could not be filed by the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel further submitted that there was
justifiable reason for the petitioner to have not filed the GST
returns and thus, the delay, if any, ought to have been condoned
by the authorities. It has also been stated that the petitioner was
also unaware of issuance of any show cause notice as no physical
show cause notice was received by it and even the fact of passing
of the order in original dated 08.04.2021 was learned by it
subsequently and only thereafter, the appeal against the same
was preferred, however, vide order dated 12.11.2024, the said
appeal was dismissed
4. Learned Counsel, while relying on the judgments
passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.10107/2025 Govind Traders Vs. Union of India & Ors.,
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12076 of 2024 titled "M/s Molana
(Uploaded on 28/11/2025 at 11:29:47 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50392-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-3711/2025]
Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax
Department & Ors" decided on 26.07.2024, D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.14658 of 2024 titled "Man Singh Tanwar v.
Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax Department
& Ors." decided on 09th September 2024, D.B. Civil Writ Petition
No. 7260/2025 titled "RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors" decided on 02.07.2025 and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
11794/2025 titled "RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors" decided on 12.08.2025 has prayed that the Respondent
Department be directed to entertain appeal of the Petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently
disputes the above submission and contends that the appeal has
rightly been dismissed being barred by limitation and no
interference in the order dated 12.11.2024 is warranted.
6. We have heard the counsel for the parties and perused
the record.
7. It is a matter of record that as per the petitioner he
was entirely dependent on his accountant for the purpose of
ensuring statutory compliances, as he himself is uneducated and
not technically competent to attend to such requirements. It is
further stated that the said accountant neither informed the
petitioner about the requirement of online filing of GST returns nor
filed the same on his own accord for the relevant period. Due to
this omission and lack of communication, the GST returns also
could not be filed by the petitioner. The reasons mentioned in the
petition for non-compliance with the relevant provisions of the Act
within the prescribed time, in the considered opinion of this Court,
appear to be genuine.
(Uploaded on 28/11/2025 at 11:29:47 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:50392-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-3711/2025]
8. This Court in the above relied upon judgments while
allowing the writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the
appeal on merits.
9. For the foregoing reasons and taking benefit of the
order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, we allow the
present writ petition and accordingly, set aside the order dated
12.11.2024 (Annex.3) passed by the Appellate Authority and
consequential summary of demand dated 12.11.2024. The
Appellate Authority is directed to consider and decide the appeal
of the petitioner on its own merits, in accordance with law, subject
to the petitioner firm depositing late fees, penalty and other
statutory deposits for entertaining the appeal, as admissible.
10. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(ANUROOP SINGHI),J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
4-Suraj/-
(Uploaded on 28/11/2025 at 11:29:47 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
