Court Upholds Importance of Adhering to Statutory Limitations in Tax Appeals
In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by M/S Mishra Security Services through its proprietor, Smt. Sunita Mishra, against the State of Uttar Pradesh. The court's decision reaffirms the importance of adhering to statutory appellate procedures and limitation periods in tax-related cases.
The petitioner sought relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging an assessment order and a notice issued by the Uttar Pradesh GST Department. However, the court found that the writ jurisdiction could not be invoked to circumvent the statutory appellate procedures or the prescribed limitation period under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The bench, comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, emphasized that the petitioner failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the appeal. The statutory appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act was not filed within the prescribed period of three months, nor was it filed within the additional one-month window allowed for sufficient cause.
The court highlighted previous Supreme Court judgments, including Singh Enterprises v. C.C.E., Jamshedpur, and Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Hongo India Private Limited, which reiterate that statutory limitations must be strictly adhered to in tax matters. The High Court emphasized that the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, cannot be invoked to extend the limitation period prescribed under special statutes like the GST Act.
The court also noted that the petitioner had initially filed a writ petition in January 2026, which was beyond the time limit and was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition. Despite this, the petitioner filed the current writ petition in an attempt to bypass the statutory limitations, which the court deemed impermissible.
The judgment underscores the principle that the High Court must consider express statutory prohibitions and principles of public policy while exercising writ jurisdiction. It further stresses that the diligence of the petitioner is a critical factor in determining the maintainability of a writ petition.
In conclusion, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that there was neither a gross violation of principles of natural justice nor patent illegality. The court made it clear that the petitioner is at liberty to proceed in accordance with the law, but the dismissal does not affect the decision of any potential appellate forum.
Bottom line:-
Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked to circumvent statutory appellate procedures or prescribed limitation periods under tax laws.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950; Section 107 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
