Goods & Services Tax
GST Case Laws

Search GST Case Laws

Keyword

Authority

Court

Section

Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order

Judge

Favouring

Login/Subscribe to get access. Plan starts from Rs. 3500/-  Subscribe Now

Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-08

On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel, Ms. A. Sivaranjani, submitted that the delay in filing these appeals are due to delay by the counsel in sending the appeal papers to the appellant and due to intervening holidays. She submitted that the delay is neither wilful nor wanton but only due to the above reasons.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-08

On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel, Shri M. Kannan, submitted that only when the Range Officers sought to know whether Appeal had been filed against O.I.A. No. 160/2017 (CTA-II) dt. 30.11.2017 or the demand confirmed had been paid, they starting searching the order in their office and eventually failed to find the same. Therefore, a copy of the impugned order was obtained on 02.04.2018. But, even so, the appellants were unable to confirm the date of receipt of the order, and hence the delay of 55 days in filing this appeal.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-08

On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel, Shri Gopal Kanakaraj A, submitted that during the appealable period, the Appellant-company was geared up for shifting of their factory. As the appellant is maintaining calendar year for international reporting, they were fully engaged in annual closing of their accounts, etc. He further stated that it took some more time for the appellant to get legal opinion on various issues involved in the disputed order. He submitted that the delay caused on the appellant’s side is unintentional and beyond the control of the appellant.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-06-08

On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel, Shri R. Balagopal, submitted that on receipt of the order-in-appeal, the appellants had asked the Accountant to contact the consultant, and prepare the other paraphernalia. However, owing to pressure of work, the Accountant had misplaced the file and failed to take immediate action leading to the delay of 5 days in submitting the appeal petition. He further submitted that the delay caused on the appellant’s side is unintentional as they have limited staff, and as a precautionary measure, have also warned the accountant for the delay caused and instructed him to attend such work on top priority basis.


Court: GSTAT Mumbai Date of Order: 2018-06-06

Learned AR for the Revenue argues that in view of the circular dated 18.12.2015, the issue involving refund is not covered under the original litigation policy circular dated 17.8.2011. Therefore, he submits that the order be recalled and the matter be heard again.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-05

On behalf of the appellant, the Ld. Counsel, Ms. Cynduja Crishnan, submitted that the appellant was not well and he was advised bed rest and hence the delay occurred in filing the appeal. She submitted that the delay is neither willful nor wanton but only due to the above reasons.


Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Order: 2018-06-01

As the delay is marginal and suitably explained, the same is condoned and Registry is directed to take the appeals on record. Appeals to come up for hearing in due course.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-05-30

Nobody present on behalf of the applicant. Having gone through the application, I find that the delay in the present appeal is only of 30 days, which stands attributed to the concerned person being unwell.


Court: GSTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2018-05-30

On perusal of records, we find that the delay has been justified and the reasons given by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal are acceptable. Accordingly, we condone the delay and direct the registry to take the appeal on record and list the same for disposal in its due course.


Court: GSTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2018-05-30

On perusal of records, we find that the delay has been justified and the reasons given by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal are acceptable. Accordingly, we condone the delay and direct the registry to take the appeal on record and list the same for disposal in its due course.