[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
M/S Kohinoor Impex vs Goods And Service Tax Council ... on 27 April, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:19779-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7899/2024
M/s Kohinoor Impex, Through Its Registered Owner Madhu Vyas,
W/o Dinesh Vyas, Aged Aged About 66 Years, R/o- Navchokiyan,
Jodhpur, District Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Goods And Service Tax Council, Tax Council, Through Its
Secretary, 5Gh Floor, Tower Ii, Jeevan Bharti Building,
Janpath Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110001.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, 1St
Floor, Main Building, Government Secretariat, Jaipur -
302005, Rajasthan.
3. Union Of India, Through Secretary Finance, Ministry Of
Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001.
4. Assistant Commissioner, Circle E, Ward I, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan.
5. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,
Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block,
New Delhi - 110001.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshvardhan Thanvi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG with
Mr. Harshvardhan
Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav
Mr. Nilesh Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order (Oral)
27/04/2026
Per: Arun Monga, J.
1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction
commanding respondents to entertain the appeal and also
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 03:56:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19779-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-7899/2024]
condone the delay and allow the filing of appeal against the
impugned order dated 18.08.2023 (Annexure-3), passed by the
Assistant Commissioner, whereby GST demand of Rs.1,13,064/-
for tax period 2017-18 was raised on the account of excess
availment of Input Tax Credit by the petitioner. The appeal against
the said order could not per force be filed before the Appellate
Authority as the online status of the appeal would reveal that the
same is time-barred. The petitioner is thus left remediless. Hence,
the petitioner, without availing the remedy of appeal, has
preferred this instant writ petition.
2. An additional affidavit dated 23.04.2026 has also been filed
by petitioner wherein it is stated that the reason for delay in
challenging the impugned order was the unnatural death of the
accountant of the petitioner. The affairs of the petitioner firm were
handled by the accountant, however, due to sudden demise of the
then accountant all the proceedings were conducted ex-parte and
in absence of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in
filing the appeal occurred due to circumstances beyond the
petitioner's control.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various
Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s M R Traders
v. UOI1, M/s Molana Construction Company v. Central
Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors2, Man Singh
Tanwar v. Commissioner, Central goods and Services Tax
Department & Ors.3, RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan &
1 2026 SCC OnLine Raj 2115
2 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 3398
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 03:56:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19779-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-7899/2024]
Ors4 and RPC PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors5 argues
that sufficient cause of delay in filing the appeal due to
circumstances beyond control has been shown and thus appeal be
directed to be considered on merits after condoning the delay by
this Court.
5. Learned counsels for the respondents oppose the above
submission and contends that the impugned order has rightly
been passed and appeal is now barred by limitation.
6. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned
counsels for the parties and perused the record.
7. Having heard, as above, it transpires that while it is true that
the Appellate Authority is bound by the statutory provisions of
limitation provided under Section 107 of the RGST/CGST Act,
2017, however, considering the reasons owing to which the
petitioner could not submit its appeal within the stipulated time,
being beyond its control, non-adjudication of appeal on merits
would cause grave injury and prejudice to the petitioner.
8. In the judgments cited above (in para 4 of preceding part of
this order), this Court, while allowing the writ petitions, issued
directions to entertain the appeal on merits.
9. In the premise, following the consistent view as already
taken by this Court, ibid, we allow the present writ petition to the
extent of condoning the delay in filing of the appeal by the
petitioner.
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 03:56:09 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:19779-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-7899/2024]
10. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to now
entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the same on
merits.
11. Before parting, we may also hasten to add that as regards
challenge to the validity of Notifications No. 13/2022 dated
05.07.2022 and Notification No. F.12(15)FD/Tax/2022-29 dated
16.07.2022 along with Notification No. 09/2023 dated 31.03.2023
and Notification No. F.12 (11) FD/Tax/2023-07 dated 04.01.2023
as also other similar notifications issued under Section 168A like
Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 and Notification No.
F.12(1)FD/Tax/2024-68 dated 01.01.2024 and in view of the
aforesaid order passed by this Court, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the said challenge is not being pressed in
the present matter, with liberty to raise and pursue the same in
appropriate proceedings. The issue qua the vires of the same is
thus left open to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings in
future.
12. Stay petition and all pending application(s), if any, stand(s)
disposed of.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (ARUN MONGA),J
152-divya/-
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 03:56:09 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
