Gauhati High Court Restores GST Appeal Rejected For 40-Day Delay Due To Daughter's Medical Treatment

The Gauhati High Court has set aside an order rejecting a taxpayer's GST appeal filed with a delay of approximately 40 days, after accepting his explanation that he was occupied with his daughter's medical treatment.

The court held that he had shown sufficient cause for the delay and that there was neither negligence nor wilful default on his part.

Justice Devashis Baruah observed,

"This Court, having given an anxious consideration to the matter and after perusing the materials on record, is of the opinion that the petitioner has been able to make out a sufficient cause for condoning the delay in preferring the Appeal. There was neither any negligence nor any willful default on the part of the petitioner in not preferring the Appeal within the statutory period of limitation."

The petitioner, Bijit Hazarika, was engaged in executing civil contracts and supplying materials through a proprietorship firm operating under his name. After the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax issued a show-cause notice under Section 73 of the Assam GST Act, 2017, an order-in-original raised a tax demand of ₹55.78 lakh against him for the financial year 2023-24.

Hazarika could not appeal within the prescribed three-month period because he was occupied with his daughter's treatment. She was suffering from Retinitis Pigmentosa, a rare inherited degenerative eye disorder affecting the retina, and was undergoing treatment at L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad.

He subsequently filed an appeal with a pre-deposit of ₹2.35 lakh. However, the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), Guwahati, rejected it as being delayed by approximately 40 days, observing that the authority had no power to condone the delay.

Before the high court, Hazarika argued that his daughter's medical condition constituted sufficient cause for the delay, which was neither wilful nor deliberate but resulted from circumstances beyond his control.

Accepting his explanation, the court also observed,

"It is also the opinion of this Court that if the Appeal filed by the petitioner is permitted to be heard on merits, no substantial prejudice or inconvenience would be caused to the respondents."

The court quashed the rejection order and directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits. It directed the parties to appear before the authority on November 27, 2026, for further proceedings.

For Petitoner: Advocate D. Gogoi

For State: Additional Advocate General B. Gogoi appeared for StK. Gogoi represented the Union of India.