Case Details: Tvl. Bullmenn Motors Versus Deputy Commissioner (CT), Coimbatore (2025) 33 Centax 54 (Mad.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Krishnan Ramasamy, J.
-
Shri T.Ramesh for the Petitioner.
-
Shri V.Prashanth Kiran, Government Adv. (Tax) for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, on scrutiny of returns, was found to have certain discrepancies, pursuant to which a notice in DRC-01 was issued proposing to demand tax, interest, and other amounts. Upon filing a reply, the Adjudicating Authority partially accepted the petitioner’s submissions, dropping proceedings relating to the demand of differential tax, reversal of input tax credit, and payment of interest for belated filing of returns, but confirming the demand of interest on payment of differential tax. An appeal was preferred against the said order; however, the Appellate Authority rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. The petitioner submitted that the delay in filing the appeal occurred because the managing partner of the petitioner-firm was undergoing medical treatment, which prevented timely filing. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court of Madras.
High Court Held
The High Court of Madras held that the reason provided by the petitioner for the belated filing of the appeal, namely the medical condition of the managing partner, appeared to be genuine. In view of the circumstances explained, and exercising powers under Section 107 of the CGST and the Tamil Nadu GST, it was directed that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned. The appeal was accordingly restored before the Appellate Authority for disposal on merits.
