Case Of: M/s VMX Global LLP
Issued By: High Court of Rajasthan
Date: 2nd July 2026
Download JPP Analysis
An additional GST demand was raised against the petitioner under Section 73 of the CGST Act. The petitioner could not file an appeal within the limitation prescribed under Section 107.
Since the statutory period had expired, the GST portal did not permit filing of the delayed appeal. The petitioner explained that its tax consultant had fallen seriously ill and, therefore, could not communicate the adjudication order or take timely steps for filing the appeal.
It was also submitted that the petitioner was engaged in LPG distribution and was dealing with extraordinary business pressure arising from LPG shortages during the ongoing Gulf War.
Due to these circumstances, the petitioner remained unaware of the order and could not avail the statutory remedy within the prescribed time. The petitioner, therefore, approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking restoration of its right to appeal and adjudication of the dispute on merits.
The Rajasthan High Court observed that a taxpayer cannot be left completely remediless merely because the statutory appellate forum had become unavailable due to limitation.
The Court noted that the demand was raised under Section 73, which applies to cases not involving fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.
It further observed that the petitioner had explained the delay by referring to the serious illness of its tax consultant and the exceptional commercial difficulties faced in the course of LPG distribution.
The Court held that the legality and correctness of the tax demand required consideration on merits instead of rejection solely on technical grounds. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal was condoned and the petitioner was directed to file a fresh appeal before the Appellate Authority within 15 days.
The Appellate Authority was directed to consider all factual and legal submissions, provide an opportunity of hearing and dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Procedural limitation should not result in complete denial of an effective appellate remedy to a taxpayer. The High Court may exercise its writ jurisdiction in exceptional circumstances where the taxpayer is otherwise left without any statutory remedy.
Serious illness of a tax consultant and extraordinary business circumstances may constitute relevant grounds while examining delay. The absence of allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression under Section 73 was also considered significant.
The judgment reinforces that genuine disputes should, wherever justified, be examined on merits rather than rejected solely on technical limitation.
The Appellate Authority must independently examine all legal and factual contentions and pass a detailed, reasoned order after granting adequate
opportunity of hearing