Case Details: Thirumalai Balaji Constructions Versus Deputy Commissioner (ST) (2025) 31 Centax 337 (Mad.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- C. Saravanan, J.
- Shri K. Vasanthanayagan for the Petitioner.
- Shri Suresh Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner’s appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act were not filed within the prescribed period of limitation. As a result, the appeals were dismissed. Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that writ petitions cannot be entertained after the expiry of the limitation period, the petitioner sought relief in the Madras High Court. The matter was placed before the Madras High Court for consideration of whether the appeal could be heard despite the expiry of the limitation period.
High Court Held
The Madras High Court held that, while the Supreme Court’s ruling on the non-entertainment of writ petitions after the expiration of the limitation period was binding, the Court had consistently allowed assessees to file appeals beyond the limitation period, provided a pre-deposit of 25% of the disputed tax was made. The petitioner was permitted to file statutory appeal within 30 days from the date of the order, subject to the pre-deposit condition.
