Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The India Cements Limited vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1612 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1612 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 February, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

The India Cements Limited vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 February, 2026

Author: Yogendra Kumar Purohit
Bench: Yogendra Kumar Purohit
[2026:RJ-JD:6356-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2416/2026

The India Cements Limited, Having Its Plant For Manufacturing
Of Cement At V And Po Wajwana, Tehsil Garhi, Banswara,
Rajasthan-Pin327025 Through Its Authorized Representative Mr.
Chetan Kumar Mehta S/o Late Khanuman Singh Mehta, Aged
About 58 Years Working As Vice President (Finance And
Accounts).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner, State Goods
         And Services Tax, Kar Bhawan, Jaipur.
2.       Joint Commissioner, State Tax, Circle A, Banswara Kar
         Bhawan,       Near       Police   Line,     Dahod         Road,   Banswara,
         Udaipur, Rajasthan
3.       Appellate Authority, Rajasthan Goods And Service Tax
         Department, Kar Bhawan, Udaipur
4.       Union Of India, Through The Ministry Of Finance, Through
         The Finance Secretary, New Delhi.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Vinay Kothari
For Respondent(s)             :     Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Order

04/02/2026

1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction

commanding respondent No.3 to condone the delay of 48 days in

filing the appeal against the assessment order dated 06.08.2025

(Annexure-3), passed by the Joint Commissioner, whereby an

additional GST demand of Rs.53,07,691/- for Financial year 2019-

2020 was raised on account of wrong availment of Input Tax

(Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 02:42:04 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6356-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-2416/2026]

Credit by the petitioner. The appeal against the said order was

filed on 23.01.2026. However, it is stated that the Appellate

Authority is not entertaining the appeal as it does not have the

power to condone the delay of 48 days in filing the appeal and

thus the same has neither been heard till date nor any formal

orders of any kind passed either way.

2. The Petitioner humbly submits that, despite exercising due

diligence and bona fide efforts to challenge the impugned order

dated 06.08.2025, it has been rendered remediless in maintaining

its statutory appeal, as the same could not be filed within the time

period prescribed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and

Services Tax Act, 2017, owing to unavoidable and exceptional

operational circumstances wholly beyond its control. The delay

occasioned is neither deliberate nor wilful, but has occurred due to

genuine administrative disruptions arising from a series of

systemic transitions undertaken by the Petitioner.

2.1. The Petitioner was acquired by Ultratech Cement Ltd./Aditya

Birla Group on 24.12.2024, resulting in organizational

restructuring and changes in management and administrative

authorities, which materially impacted the handling of statutory

compliances. Thereafter, with effect from 01.08.2025, the

Petitioner undertook a large-scale operational transition whereby

its accounts, bill processing, GST compliances, and allied financial

functions relating to its Banswara Plant were migrated to Ultratech

Knowledge Service Centre (UKSC), Pune. This transition involved

significant restructuring of workflows, revision of access

permissions, changes in compliance-tracking systems, and

(Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 02:42:04 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6356-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-2416/2026]

migration of GST portal credentials and departmental alerts to

newly designated official email IDs.

2.2 Simultaneously, the migration of data from legacy systems to

newly issued laptops and secured servers resulted in delayed

access to critical records, including the impugned order, leading to

an inadvertent oversight of the statutory appeal timeline. It is,

therefore, respectfully submitted that the cumulative effect of the

aforesaid bona fide and unavoidable transitional and

administrative constraints caused the unintentional delay, without

any negligence, inaction, or lack of due diligence on the part of

the Petitioner, and accordingly warrants condonation of delay in

the interest of justice.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, we have heard the learned

counsels for the parties and perused the record.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying on the various

Division Bench judgments of this very Court in M/s Molana

Construction Company v. Central Goods and Service Tax

Department & Ors1, Man Singh Tanwar v. Commissioner,

Central goods and Services Tax Department & Ors. 2, RPC

PSIPL JV Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors 3 and RPC PSIPL JV

Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors4 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.

(Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 02:42:04 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6356-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-2416/2026]

5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the above

submission and contends that the assessment order has rightly

been passed, appeal is now barred by limitation.

6. 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 Act, 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.

7. In the judgments cited above, this court, while allowing the

writ petitions, have issued directions to entertain the appeal on

merits.

8. In the premise, following the same view as already taken by

various Coordinate Benches of this Court, ibid, with which we are

in agreement, we allow the present writ petition to the extent of

condoning the delay of 48 days in filing of the appeal by the

petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to entertain

the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the appeal on merits.

10. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand

disposed of.

                                   (YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J                                         (ARUN MONGA),J

                                    6-Ishan/-




                                                           (Uploaded on 04/02/2026 at 02:42:04 PM)




Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter