Disposed¶41

M/s Genius Consultants Ltd. v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Jun 2026CWJC/2664/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Genius Consultants Ltd. v. State of Bihar; Patna High Court CWJC No.2664 of 2026, decided 17-06-2026 (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad J, per; Kumar Manish J). GST dispute: appeal against Order-in-Original Form GST DRC-07 dated 25.11.2023 (₹95,800 CGST/SGST, FY 2017-18 July-March) rejected by Order-in-Appeal No. AD100724007960G dated 17.10.2025 for want of condonation-of-delay grounds; Sections 107(1), 107(4) and 112 CGST/BGST Act 2017 discussed; writ permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file Second Appeal under Section 112; no opinion on merits; no recovery restraint granted.

What did the court decide?

Writ application permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to pursue the statutory Second Appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017 before the competent forum; no opinion recorded on the merits of the petitioner's contentions. ¶41

M/s Genius Consultants Ltd. Vs The State of Bihar — GST and Indirect Tax | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the Order-in-Appeal No. AD100724007960G dated 17.10.2025 rejecting the petitioner's appeal should be quashed. +2 more

¶18

Ratio / Principle

The Court accepted the petitioner's prayer and permitted the writ application to be withdrawn with liberty to seek the available statutory remedy before the competent forum (Second Appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017).

¶36

Key takeaways

The Court expressly clarified that it had not recorded any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's contentions.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CWJC No.2664 of 2026 (oral order dated 17-06-2026, per Rajeev Ranjan Prasad J; bench with Kumar Manish J). M/s Genius Consultants Ltd. sought quashing of Order-in-Appeal No. AD100724007960G dated 17.10.2025 of the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Patna West Division, rejecting its appeal against the Order-in-Original in Form GST DRC-07 dated 25.11.2023 of the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna Central Circle-1, which demanded ₹95,800/- towards CGST and SGST for FY 2017-18 (July to March), and sought restraint on coercive recovery. On the limitation point, counsel stated Section 107(1) allows three months with a maximum one-month condonation on cogent reasons; counsel admitted the memorandum of appeal (with Annexure-C citing medical reasons) was not enclosed with the writ petition, and the Appellate Authority's observation that no reason for condonation was shown stood uncontested. The petitioner then opted to avail a Second Appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017, to which the State raised no objection. The Court permitted withdrawal of the writ application with liberty to seek the remedy before the competent forum and expressly recorded no opinion on the merits.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2664 of 2026

¶2

======================================================

¶3

M/s Genius Consultants Ltd. Branch office at A/208, Capital Tower, Fraser Road, Patna, Bihar, 800001 though its Authorised Signatory Saurabh Sett, male, aged about 55 years, son of Ranjit Sett, resident of 8A/1 Ray Street L. R. Sarani S.O., District- Kolkata, West Bengal - 700020.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna.

¶7

Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Patna West Division, Patna.

¶8

Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna West Circle, Patna.

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Prasad, G.P.-07 Mr. Prateyush Kumar, AC to GP-07

¶12

======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUMAR MANISH ORAL ORDER

¶15

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

¶16

2 17-06-2026 This writ application has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:

¶17

i. For issuing of

¶18

writ/order/direction/declaration in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order or direction in the nature thereof to quash the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. AD100724007960G dated 17.10.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) Patna, West Division Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Appellate Authority"), rejecting the appeal

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.2664 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/5

¶20

filed by the petitioner against the Order-inOriginal (OIO) in Form GST DRC- 07, dated 25.11.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax Patna central circle-1, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the Adjudicating Authority"),

¶21

ii. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the Order-in-Original in Form GST DRC-07, dated 25.11.2023, passed by the Learned Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna Central Circle1, Patna West, Bihar, whereby the Petitioner has been illegally directed to make payment of a sum of ₹95,800/- (Rupees Ninety-Five Thousand Eight Hundred only) towards CGST and SGST for the period FY 2017-18 (July to March).

¶22

iii. For issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the Appellant Authority to reconsider the appeal on its merits by Exercising its power to condone any technical delay in filing the appeal under Section 107(4) of the CGST Act and by Examining the substantive grounds of the appeal and by Considering the petitioner's written submissions and supporting documents and pass a fresh order after giving the petitioner a fair hearing.

¶23

iv. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Respondent authorities from taking any coercive steps, including recovery proceedings, for realization of

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.2664 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/5

¶25

the disputed amount of ₹95,800/-, during the pendency and final disposal of the present writ application.

¶26

v. For issuance of any other writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

¶27

In course of hearing of the writ petition, we called upon Mr. Alok Ranjan, learned Advocate for the petitioner to demonstrate from the records as to whether any application seeking condonation of delay was filed before the Appellate Authority and if so, the grounds stated therein be placed before this Court.

¶28

Mr. Alok Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner has passed over a copy of the memorandum of appeal in the given format and claims that with the said appeal, there was one page attached called Annexure-C in which there is a statement that due to some medical reasons, the appeal could not be filed. Learned counsel, however, admits that the said memorandum of appeal has not been enclosed with the writ petition.

¶29

Learned counsel for the State submits that on a bare perusal of the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority, it would appear that before the Appellate Authority,

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.2664 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 4/5

¶31

no reason was shown for purpose of condonation of delay. The observation of the Appellate Authority present in the impugned order has not been contested by raising any specific plea in the writ application. It has neither been contested by way of pleading.

¶32

Learned counsel submits that Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax/Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CGST/BGST Act, 2017’) provides a period of limitation of three months for filing of an appeal. The Appellate Authority has been further conferred with power to condone delay for a period of maximum one month on showing cogent and sufficient reasons.

¶33

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the impugned order, the petitioner has a remedy to file a Second Appeal under Section 112 of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017 which he may be allowed to avail.

¶34

Learned counsel for the State has no objection to

¶35

the same.

¶36

In such circumstance, we accept the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner. The writ application is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to seek his remedy before the competent forum, as may be advised to

¶37

Patna High Court CWJC No.2664 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 5/5

¶38

him.

¶39