GST Appeal Cannot Be Entertained Beyond Statutory Limit Of 120 Days: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has held that delay in filing an appeal against cancellation of GST registration cannot be condoned beyond the statutory maximum period of 120 days (3+1 months) prescribed under Section 107 of the CGST Act.

A Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi, in a judgment dated 22 January 2026, dismissed a writ petition filed by Rajesh Industries, a proprietorship firm, holding that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked to override legislative timelines.

The Court observed:

“Thus, even if the Appellate Authority in its discretion had accepted the cause shown by the petitioner for belatedly filing the appeal, the Appellate Authority had the power to condone the delay for a period of one month and allow such appeal to be filed within period of limitation of one month only.”

Rajesh Industries is engaged in the manufacture of cake boxes and wooden cake bases. A show cause notice dated 2 February 2022 was issued proposing cancellation of its GST registration on the ground of continuous non-filing of returns. Thereafter, by an order dated 21 February 2023, the GST authorities cancelled the registration retrospectively with effect from 31 July 2022.

The petitioner contended that it was unaware of the show cause notice uploaded on the GST portal and that the cancellation order was “cryptic” and did not assign proper reasons, and therefore violated principles of natural justice. It also attributed the non-filing of returns to the professional negligence of its tax consultant.

On 4 December 2025, the Appellate Authority rejected the petitioner's challenge of the cancellation as being barred by limitation. The Authority noted that “the petitioner did not remain present for asserting its case before the appellate authority.”

The High Court reiterated that under Section 107 of the CGST Act, an appeal must be filed within three months from the date of the order, and a further period of one month may be condoned if sufficient cause is shown. Thus, the maximum limitation period available is 120 days.

Applying this to the facts, the Court observed:

“In the present case, the petitioner has filed appeal after a period of one and half year, which is over and above the aforesaid period… Thus, the Appellate Authority has precisely held that it does not have the power to condone the delay in filing the appeal beyond the period of limitation of 120 days.”

The Court refused to examine the petitioner's challenge to the validity of the show cause notice and cancellation order on merits, including the plea of violation of natural justice, holding that once the statutory appeal was filed beyond the maximum condonable period, the limitation could not be bypassed by invoking writ jurisdiction.

On the scope of condonation of delay and exercise of writ jurisdiction, the Court relied on decisions of the Supreme Court of India, including the judgment in GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Limited, and emphasised that statutory timelines in taxing statutes must be strictly followed and cannot be relaxed by constitutional courts.

The Court further cautioned that “tax payers are supposed to remain vigilant of all the proceedings and have to timely verify the orders on the portal.”

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the writ petition.

For Petitioner: Advocate Palak M Devpura

For State: Assistant Government Pleader Tanushree Shrimal