[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Monika Khandelwal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 5 February, 2026
Author: Yogendra Kumar Purohit
Bench: Yogendra Kumar Purohit
[2026:RJ-JD:6629-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1554/2024
Smt. Monika Khandelwal, Flat No 202, Riddhi Vinayak Society,
Ratan Nagar, Aiims Road, Jodhpur. In The Capacity Of Proprietor
Of Erstwhile Shri Khandelwal Handicrafts, E-67, Phase-I,
Boranada, Jodhpur, Rajasthan- 342012.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Finance, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Union Of India, Through Secretary Finance, Ministry Of
Finance, Government Of India, Shastri Bhawan, New
Delhi - 110001.
3. Goods And Services Tax Council, Through Its Secretary,
5Th Floor, Tower Ii, Jeevan Bharti Building, Janpath Road,
Connaught Place, New Delhi - 110001.
4. Office Of Assistant Commissioner, Ward-2, Circle-C,
Jodhpur Zone-Ii.
5. Commissioner Of State Tax, Rgst Kar Bhawan, Ambedkar
Circle, Bhawani Singh Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sharad Kothari with
Mr. Dinesh Kumar Bishnoi and
Mr. Kalpit Shishodia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG
Mr. Ram avtar Sikhwal for
Mr. Nathu Singh Rathore, AAG
Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav, Dy.G.C.
Mr. Rajat Arora
Mr. Vipul Singhvi
Mr. Rajvendra Sarswat with
Mr. Jitesh Kumar Suthar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT
Order (Oral)
05/02/2026
Per: Arun Monga, J
1. The petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks a direction
commanding respondents to entertain the appeal and also
condone the delay and allow the filing of appeal against the
assessment order dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure- 4), passed by the
(Uploaded on 11/02/2026 at 05:19:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6629-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-1554/2024]
Assistant Commissioner, whereby an additional GST demand for
Financial year 2018-19 was raised on account of the alleged
mismatch between Form GSTR-2A and Form GSTR-3B, leading to
a claim of excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) availed by the petitioner.
A recovery notice dated 27.12.2023 was issued against the
petitioner demanding a sum of Rs. 8,79,497/- for the aforsaid
period. 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. The delay in filing the present petition is bona fide and has
occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the
petitioner. It is submitted that, upon closure of the firm, the
petitioner had no occasion or reason to regularly access or
monitor the GST portal and was under a bona fide belief that no
further communications would be initiated therein. Consequently,
the petitioner remained unaware of the notice issued in Form GST
ASMT-10 and was not in a position to submit any response within
the prescribed time. The resulting delay is neither intentional nor
deliberate but occurred due to genuine and reasonable
circumstances, and therefore deserves to be condoned 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
(Uploaded on 11/02/2026 at 05:19:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6629-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-1554/2024]
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.
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 in filing of the appeal by the petitioner.
(Uploaded on 11/02/2026 at 05:19:14 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:6629-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-1554/2024]
9. Accordingly, the Appellate Authority is directed to now
entertain the appeal of the petitioner and adjudicate the same on
merits.
10. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J (ARUN MONGA),J
72-Devanshi/-
(Uploaded on 11/02/2026 at 05:19:14 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
