The Patna High Court has clarified how taxpayers in Bihar can still pursue an appeal under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime even when the earlier appeal was dismissed as time-barred. In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner challenged an appellate order that had rejected its statutory appeal solely on the ground of delay beyond the period permitted under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act). The High Court—speaking through a Division Bench led by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice—set aside the appellate rejection and permitted restoration of the appeal, subject to compliance with the conditions laid down in the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) Notification No. 53/2023–Central Tax dated 02.11.2023.

Simplified Explanation of the Judgment

Under Section 107 of the BGST Act, an assessee has three months to file an appeal against an order of the Proper Officer. The law also allows an additional one month for filing a delayed appeal, provided the appellant explains the delay satisfactorily. Beyond this combined period, neither the appellate authority nor the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, ordinarily has the power to condone delay. In this case, the petitioner’s appeal had been filed beyond even that outer one-month extension and was therefore dismissed as time-barred by the first appellate authority.

However, an important development altered the legal landscape. The CBIC issued Notification No. 53/2023–Central Tax dated 02.11.2023, prescribing a special procedure for filing appeals against orders passed by Proper Officers on or before 31.03.2023 under Sections 73 and 74 of the Act. This notification extended the last date for filing such appeals up to 31.01.2024. Crucially, it also stipulated specific pre-deposit conditions that must be satisfied for such appeals to be maintainable under the special window. The High Court examined this notification in detail and concluded that it effectively permits restoration or filing of delayed appeals—beyond the usual statutory outer limit—so long as the assessee follows the special procedure within the prescribed time.

The notification’s key features, as noted by the Court, include:

• Deadline: The appeal in FORM GST APL-01 must be filed on or before 31.01.2024. If an appeal is already pending, it will be deemed compliant with the notification provided the special conditions are fulfilled.
• Pre-deposit/Payments: The appellant must pay (a) the admitted amount of tax, interest, fine, fee, and penalty in full; and (b) 12.5% of the remaining disputed tax, capped at ₹25 crores, with at least 20% of that 12.5% paid via the Electronic Cash Ledger.
• Refund Embargo: No refund will be granted (till disposal of the appeal) if any amount paid exceeds the specified threshold before the notification.
• Scope: The special route is not available where the demand does not involve tax, and the appeal procedure in Chapter XIII of the CGST Rules applies mutatis mutandis.

Applying these provisions, the Court found that the petitioner’s appeal—though originally dismissed for being beyond the condonable period—could now be restored to the appellate file, provided the petitioner complies with the notification’s conditions, especially the pre-deposit requirement, by 31.01.2024. The Bench therefore set aside the appellate rejection and gave the petitioner liberty to deposit the deficient amount—clarifying that ordinarily 10% of the disputed tax would/ought to have been remitted at the time of filing an appeal under the standard provision, and the balance required to reach the 12.5% level (as per the notification) must be satisfied within the notified time. If these conditions are not met within the deadline, the appeal will stand rejected.

Significantly, the Court issued a broader clarification for similarly placed taxpayers. It observed that even where the High Court has, in earlier cases, rejected writ petitions solely because the statutory appeals were filed beyond the condonable period under Section 107(4), those taxpayers are still entitled to take benefit of the CBIC notification—independently of such orders—if they meet the notification’s conditions. The Court also directed the Commissioner, State Taxes, Government of Bihar, to issue necessary instructions to field officers and appellate authorities to ensure that appeals are restored and considered on merits once the special conditions are scrupulously complied with.

In essence, the judgment acknowledges that while statutory time limits are ordinarily rigid, the special amnesty-like window created by the CBIC in November 2023 offers a lawful route for taxpayers to cure the earlier bar of limitation—without the Court having to “condone” delay beyond the statute. The High Court has harmonized the statutory scheme with the executive notification by enabling restoration of such appeals strictly on the notification’s terms and within its timeframe. This ensures both legal certainty and practical relief to assessees facing genuine hardship due to time-lapsed appeals.

Significance or Implication of the Judgment

For taxpayers in Bihar, especially those who received orders under Sections 73 or 74 on or before 31.03.2023 and missed the standard appeal timeline, this judgment confirms a practical remedy: use the 02.11.2023 notification’s special procedure to revive your appellate remedy, but do so strictly by 31.01.2024 and with the required pre-deposits. The ruling also guides the State administration to uniformly apply the CBIC notification so that similarly situated assessees are not forced into fragmented litigation merely to get their appeals listed. For the government, it streamlines dispute resolution by channeling time-barred matters into the appellate mechanism on merits, after ensuring a meaningful pre-deposit to safeguard revenue.

Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision with reasoning

• Whether a time-barred appeal dismissed under Section 107 can be revived in light of CBIC Notification No. 53/2023–Central Tax (02.11.2023).
  Decision: Yes, the appeal can be restored to the appellate file provided the assessee complies with the special conditions—especially payment of admitted dues and 12.5% of disputed tax (with at least 20% of that via cash ledger)—by 31.01.2024 as per the notification. If not complied with, the appeal will stand rejected.
• Whether the High Court or appellate authority can condone delay beyond the outer limit in Section 107 absent such a notification.
  Decision: No. The statutory outer limit is binding. The relief here is not “condonation beyond the statute,” but recognition of a special, time-bound appellate window created by the CBIC notification, which the Court permits assessees to invoke.
• Whether similarly situated assessees, whose writs were earlier rejected for delay, can still seek the benefit of the notification.
  Decision: Yes. The Court clarified that prior writ rejections solely on limitation do not bar recourse to the special procedure. The Commissioner is directed to issue instructions so that such appeals are restored when notification conditions are met.

Case Title

M/s Micro Zone Vs. The Union of India

Case Number

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16155 of 2023

Coram and Names of Judges

Hon’ble the Chief Justice (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy. Date of Judgment: 10.11.2023.

Names of Advocates and who they appeared for

• For the petitioner: Mr. Anurag Saurav, Advocate
• For the respondents (Union/Tax Authorities): Dr. K. N. Singh, ASG; Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX; Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC-11.

Link to Judgment

MTUjMTYxNTUjMjAyMyMxI04=-eY53XoC0s44=

If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.