^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

PRAMOD KUMAR TOMAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MUNDKA DIVISION DELHI WEST, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX & ANOTHER
(Delhi High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SANJEEV SACHDEVA
RAVINDER DUDEJA

Pet. Counsel

Nitin Gulati

Res. Counsel

Aakarsh Srivastava

Petitioner / Applicant	PRAMOD KUMAR TOMAR
Respondent	ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MUNDKA DIVISION DELHI WEST, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX & ANOTHER
Court	Delhi High Court
State	Delhi
Date	Apr 26, 2024
Order No.	W. P. (C) 4401/2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 9505
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Rule 108

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 18.10.2023, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner impugning the Order-in-Original dated 12.08.2022 rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner, has been dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. 2. The Appellate Authority has held that there was a delay in filing the appeal for the reason that Order-in-Original that was subject matter of the appeal before the Appellate Authority was not uploaded with the appeal at the time of online filing and copy of the same was physically filed after a gap of nearly ten months and as such the appeal was barred by time. 3. Petitioner impugned the Order-in-Original dated 12.08.2022 by filing the appeal through the on-line mode. The appeal was filed on 12.11.2022. At the time of physical hearing of the appeal on 29.08.2023, petitioner was called upon to file a physical copy of the Order-in-Original which was filed. Since the physical copy was filed on 29....