IN THE H M/S SAIN DASS UNION OF IND CORAM : HO HO Present : Mr for Ms DEEPAK SIBA Th Section 54 of th was rejected by on 06.11.2024, of the Act whic communication dated 06.02.202 petition. 2. Lea able assistance, 3. Rel reproduced belo Sr. No.141 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB A CHANDIGARH CWP-750 Date of D ASS OVERSEAS Versus F INDIA AND ORS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA Mr. Sholab Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. (Through V.C.) Ms. Ridhi Bansal, Advocate for the *** SIBAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner’s application for r 4 of the Central Goods and Services A by the revenue through order dated 2024, the petitioner filed a statutory a t which appeal has been rejected, on t cation dated 06.02.2026 (Annexure 02.2026 is the subject matter of ch Learned counsel for the parties hav tance, the records of the case have also Relevant Sub Sections of Sect below for ready reference:- JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH 7505-2026(O&M) te of Decision : 07.04.2026 …PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS EPAK SIBAL PITA BANERJI V.C.) for the respondents. for refund of GST, made under ices Act, 2017 (for short-the Act), r dated 03.07.2020 against which, utory appeal under Section 107(1) on the ground of delay, through exure P-12). The communication of challenge through the instant ies have been heard and with their ve also been perused. Section 107 of the Act are PRINCE SAINI 2026.04.10 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-7505-2026 “10 und Un Adj as whi per (8) app (12 app det dec 4. As appeal filed und grant opportunit Sec appeal, the App determination an 5. In Section 107(1) o for refund has b order whatsoeve ground of dela impugned comm of the Appellate 2026(O&M) 107(1) Any person aggrieved by a under this Act or the State Goods Union Territory Goods and S Adjudicating Authority may appeal as may be prescribed within thre which the said decision or order person. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (8) The Appellate Authority shall appellant of being heard. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (12) The order of the Appellate appeal shall be in writing and determination, the decision thereo decision.” As per Section 107(8) of the Act under Section 107(1), the Appella ortunity of personal hearing to the appe Section 107(12) further provides t e Appellate Authority is first required tion and then decide them through a re n the case in hand, the petitioner 07(1) of the Act, to challenge therein has been rejected without passing an tsoever was passed and rejection of th f delay was simply conveyed to communication dated 06.02.2026 sig pellate Authority. -2- by any decision or order passed ods and Services Tax Act or the d Services Tax Act by an peal to such Appellate Authority three months from the date on rder is communicated to such xxxxxxxxxxxx hall give an opportunity to the xxxxxxxxxxxx late Authority disposing of the and shall state the points for ereon and the reasons for such e Act, before finally deciding an ppellate Authority is required to e appellant. ides that before disposing of any equired to formulate the points of gh a reasoned order. itioner’s appeal, filed by it under herein the order rejecting its claim ing any reasoned order. In fact, no n of the petitioner’s appeal on the d to the petitioner through the 026 signed by the Superintendent PRINCE SAINI 2026.04.10 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-7505-2026 6. Prio personal hearing 7. In respondent-Dep with the petitio appreciate. 7. In resulting in setti (Annexure P-12 pass a fresh ord the rejection of i 07.04.2026 Prince Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : 2026(O&M) rior to rejection of the petitioner’ earing was also granted. In the light of the above, we Department has adopted a rather petitioner’s statutory appeal, which In view of the afore discussion, th in setting aside of the impugned comm 12). However, liberty is granted to sh order on the petitioner’s appeal file ion of its claim for refund, in accordanc (DEEPAK JU (LAPITA JU asoned : Yes/No Yes/No -3- tioner’s appeal, no opportunity of we are of the opinion that the ather casual approach in dealing which least to say, we do not , this writ petition is allowed, communication dated 06.02.2026 nted to the Appellate Authority to eal filed by it to challenge therein ordance with law. EPAK SIBAL) JUDGE APITA BANERJI) JUDGE PRINCE SAINI 2026.04.10 15:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document