M/S. Sumitra Mohapatra, Karanjapada, Balasore Vs the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Odisha, Commissionerate of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, Cuttack

Challenging legality and propriety of order dated 17^th January, 2025 passed in Appeal Case No.AD211224000882P by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Territorial Range, Balasore-opposite party no.3 rejecting the appeal on the ground that the same was filed beyond the period prescribed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (collectively, “GST Act”), the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition invoking provisions under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer(s):-

¶15

“Under the above circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this petition, call for and peruse the relevant records and after hearing the petitioner’s counsel, be further pleased to;

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

(i) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed by the Opp. Party No.3 along with GST APL 02 dated 17.01.2025 under Annexures 8 and 7 respectively.

¶18

(ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Opp. Party No.3 to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits appertaining to Form GST APL 02 dated 31.01.2023 as set aside by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 06.11.2023 under Annexure-4.

¶19

(iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus restraining the Opp. Parties from enforcing the demand penalty and interest as computed in the Form GST DRC 07 under Anneuxre-1

¶20

(iv) Issue any appropriate writ (s)/direction(s)/deemed fit in the fact and circumstances of the case.”

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that challenging the adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022 pertaining to tax periods from July, 2017 to March, 2018, the petitioner filed appeal bearing Appeal No.AD211222009941O, which was rejected by order dated 31^st January, 2023 on the ground of delay in submission of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act. Challenging said appellate order, the petitioner came up before this Court in WP(C) No.9499 of 2023, wherein having taken cognizance of F. No. CBIC-20001/10/ 2023-GST in Notification No.53/2023— Central Tax vide S.O. No.4767(E), dated 2^nd November, 2023, disposed of said writ petition along with batch of matters being WP(C) No.6648 of 2023 on 6^th November, 2023, with the following direction:

¶22

Page 2 of 5

¶23

“6. In view of the aforesaid Notification, the impugned orders, against which the writ petitions are filed, are set aside and the matters are now remanded to the Appellate Authority to proceed with it in accordance with law. As such, by virtue of either of the interim order passed by this Court or in suo motu the petitioners, who have deposited the entire amount of tax that should be taken into account while deciding the cases on merit and the refund, if any, would be subject to the outcome of the appeal itself.”

¶24

2.1. It is submitted that when this Court by virtue of aforesaid order directed for revival of appeal bearing Appeal No.AD211222009941O for adjudication on merit, the petitioner under a misconceived notion filed another appeal bearing Appeal No.AD211224000882P on 5^th December, 2024 challenging the selfsame adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022.

¶25

2.2. However, the appellate authority disposed of the latter appeal by order dated 17^th January, 2025 on the ground that the appeal is barred by limitation provided under Section 107 as there was a delay of more than two years one month one day.

¶26

2.3. It is vehemently contended that since the appeal challenging the adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022 was pending in appeal bearing Case No.AD211222009941O pursuant to the direction of this Court vide order dated 6^th November, 2023, the appellate authority erred in rejecting the appeal filed later on challenging the self-same adjudication order.

¶27

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department, on instruction, submitted that the statement of the fact as submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

true and correct. He submitted that in fact in view of order dated 6^th November, 2023, the earlier appeal being Appeal No.AD211222009941O stands revived and is now pending adjudication by the appellate authority.

¶30

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organisation.

¶31

Perused the record, it is apparent that appeal bearing Appeal Case No.AD211224000882P was filed challenging the adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022, which was filed after the order dated order dated 6^th November, 2023 passed in WP(C) No.6684 of 2023 and batch.

¶32

In view of said order of this Court and as candidly conceded by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Department upon instruction that the appeal being Appeal No.AD211222009941O challenging the adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022 is pending, the latter appeal being Case No.AD211224000882P is to be treated as non est .

¶33

6.1. This Court is taken to sub-section (13) of Section 107 of the GST Act, wherein it has been stipulated that “the Appellate Authority shall, where it is possible to do so, hear and decide every appeal within a period of one year from the date on which it is filed”.

¶34

6.2. With the aforesaid fact-situation and perceiving peculiarity in the present matter, this Court accedes to the prayer of the petitioner and sets aside the order dated 17^th January, 2025 passed in Appeal Case No.AD211224000882P and directs the authority concerned to treat the said appeal filed on 5^th December,

¶35

Page 4 of 5

¶36

2024 as if it is non est. However, since the record reveals that the appeal bearing Appeal No.AD211222009941O challenging the adjudication order dated 4^th August, 2022 is pending adjudication on merit pursuant to disposal of WP(C) No.6684 of 2023 and batch of writ petition vide order dated 6^th November, 2023, the appellate authority may take up said appeal for disposal after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the communication of this order.

¶37

6.3. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. As a result of disposal of the writ petition, pending Interlocutory Application(s), if any, is disposed of accordingly.

¶38

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶39

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶40

Laxmikant

¶41

Signature Not Verified

¶42

Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 28-Nov-2025 16:24:43

¶43

Page 5 of 5

M/S. Sumitra Mohapatra, Karanjapada, Balasore v. the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Odisha, Commissionerate of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Sumitra Mohapatra, Karanjapada, Balasore v. the Commissioner Ct and Gst, Odisha, Commissionerate of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Odisha

Dinabandhu Samal Vs State of Odisha

Shyamsundar Das Vs State of Odisha

Jyotsnarani Dash Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bbsr 1, Khurda

Divine Construction, Jajpur Vs the State Tax Officer, Ct and GST Circle

M/S Laxmi Cold Storage, Bargaon Vs Additional Commissioner of State Tax Appeal, Rourkela