Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Binod Kumar Yadav, through its proprietor, challenged an ex parte assessment order dated 20.01.2021, claiming he only learned of it later from his accountant and, on verifying the GST portal, found a show cause notice dated 11.12.2020 and the finalised order under "additional notices and orders," both of which he had failed to check in time. No appeal was filed against the assessment order under Section 107 of the Bihar GST Act, 2017 despite the availability of that remedy.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner, having failed to avail the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the BGST Act within the prescribed period — even accounting for the Supreme Court's COVID-19 limitation extension — could invoke Article 226 to challenge an ex parte assessment order on the ground that notices were uploaded on the GST portal rather than served conventionally.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The order was passed ex parte and the petitioner was unaware of it until informed by his accountant, having failed to notice the portal upload of the show cause notice and the final order.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Department had duly sent notices via the GST portal, which the petitioner failed to check despite the portal being the prescribed and universally applicable mode of service.

Court Order / Findings

  • Under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act, an assessee has three months to file an appeal, extendable by a further one month on satisfactory explanation for delay.
  • It is trite law that where the statute prescribes a specific delay-condonation period, Section 5 of the Limitation Act has no application, and no further delay can be condoned by the statutory authority.
  • Even applying the Supreme Court's order in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 saving limitation between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 and granting a further three months to initiate proceedings or appeals, the petitioner had still not taken the remedy within the period stipulated either by the statute or by the Supreme Court.
  • Having failed to avail the statutory remedy, the petitioner could not invoke Article 226 to challenge the assessment order; the writ petition was found not maintainable and dismissed in limine.

Important Clarification

Where a GST enactment such as the BGST Act prescribes its own fixed period for filing an appeal with a capped condonable extension, Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has no application to extend that period further, and neither the appellate authority nor a writ court can condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit — this holds true even after accounting for the Supreme Court's COVID-19 suo motu limitation-extension order, once that order's own additional window has also lapsed. Reliance on notices being served via GST-portal upload, without more, is not by itself a ground to bypass the statutory appeal remedy.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107(4), Bihar GST Act, 2017 – three-month appeal period, extendable by one further month on sufficient cause, with no power to condone delay thereafter.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the Department — the writ petition was dismissed in limine for failure to avail the statutory appellate remedy within any permissible limitation window.

Case Details

High Court of Judicature at Patna; Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4318 of 2023; Coram: Hon'ble The Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad; Order dated 17.04.2023; CNR not indicated on the order copy.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.