HC Condoned Appeal Delay Due to Managing Partner’s Medical Treatment

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

Appeal delay condonation
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. 

List of Cases Reviewed

List of Case Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
SC Rules Freight Collected by Agents Not Taxable

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 30, 2025

Service Tax Demand Invalid When Trade Discounts Passed On | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 28, 2025

CGST Officers Can Pursue Pending Service Tax Matters | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 22, 2025

Constructive Res Judicata Applies to Successive Writs under Article 226 | HC

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 21, 2025

CESTAT | One-Time Premium on Lease Liable to Service Tax

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 19, 2025

Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 18, 2025

Lessor liable for Service Tax on extra lease rent for vacant land | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 13, 2025

CESTAT | Govt.-approved vocational courses exempt from Service Tax

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 13, 2025

No Service Tax on IFMS Collected by Builders | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 11, 2025

Chocolate-Coated Wafers Classified Under CETH 1905 32 90

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

August 2, 2025