Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19281 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 274 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S D.R. Hotels Private Limited Lucknow Thru. Its Finance Director Mr. Amitabh Porwal Respondent :- The Additional Commissioner,Grade-Ii,State Gst Lucknow Counsel for Petitioner :- Jameel Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel. 2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 30.08.2024 whereby, the appeal was dismissed as being beyond limitation, recording the reasoning as "delay in submission of appeal." 3. The submission of the Counsel for the petitioner is that an order came to be passed against the petitioner on 21.07.2022. 4. Admittedly the petitioner did not file an appeal as was prescribed. Subsequently, a Notification No.53 of 2023, dated 02.11.2023 was issued by the Central Government, whereby, the persons, who could not file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, were given the extension subject to their paying the amount in full of the tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty as was admitted by the assessee and a sum equal to twelve and a half per cent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the orders passed. On deposit of the said amount, the appeal could be preferred till 31.01.2024. 5. In pursuance to the said extension granted by virtue of Notification No.53 of 2023, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 25.02.2023, however, the said appeal came to be dismissed on 30.08.2024. 6. The submission of the Counsel for the petitioner is that once a notification was issued extending the time for filing the appeal, the same could not have been dismissed on the ground of limitation. He further argues that the entire amount as adjudicated against the petitioner was already deducted, thus, no amounts were required to be paid. 7. Learned Standing Counsel based upon instructions states that although the order dismissing the appeal does not record any reason whatsoever, however, as per his instructions, as the petitioner did not deposit 12.5% amount in terms of the notification, the appeal had to be dismissed rightly and the benefit of the Notification No.53 of 2023 could not be extended to the petitioner. 8. Considering the submissions made at the bar, the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred by Section 148 of the CGST, extended the time for filing appeal for all the assessees, who could not file the appeal under the time prescribed against an order passed under Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act. If the said order was passed before 31.03.2023, an additional precondition was prescribed that the assessee would have deposited admitted amount etc. and the additional 12.5% of the remaining amount of tax which is deposited by the assessee. 9. In the present case, as the entire amount as assessed against the petitioner has already been deducted, no amount has to be paid, thus, the condition no.3 as prescribed in the Notification No.53 of 2023 stood satisfied by the assessee. 10. In view thereof, the appeal had to be heard on merits and had to be disposed off on merit. The said appeal could not be dismissed as being beyond limitation. 11. On the reasoning recorded above, the order impugned passed in appeal dated 30.08.2024 cannot be sustained and is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. 12. The matter is remanded to the appellate authority to pass fresh order in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing. 13. It is further clarified that the appeal filed by the petitioner shall be treated to be within time in terms of Notification No.53 of 2023. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 akverma Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench