HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA WP(C) No.803 of 2024 M.M Enterprise, C/o Asian paints Ltd Near Tripura Sundari Nursing College, Uttar Champamura, Bypass Road, Old Agartala, Tripura West 799008 Represented by Sri Mitra Ghosh, Ware house Manager, Asian Paints Ltd, Tripura, of B.K. Road, North Banamalipur, Agartala, Agartala AMC, West Tripura, Tripura ……… Petitioner(s). V E R S U S 1. Commissioner (Appeals), CGST,Central Excise and Customs, 3rd Floor, GST Bhawan, Kedar Road, Machkhowa, Guwahati-781001. 2. Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Tripura-I, Agartala 3rd Floor, Jackson Gate Building, Lenin Sarani, Agartala-799001. ……… Respondent(s). For Petitioner : Mr. Vinoy Shroff, Advocate, Mr. Arjun Acharjee, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Paramartha Datta, Advocate. HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT Order 20/02/2025 Heard Mr. Vinoy Shroff, learned counsel together with Mr. Arjun Acharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Paramartha Datta for the respondents-revenue. The demand-cum-show cause notice dated 22.03.2021, the order in original dated 05.05.2022 and the order in appeal dated 23.08.2024 passed by respondent Nos.2 and 1 respectively are under challenge in the present writ petition. The appeal has been rejected as being barred by limitation beyond one year ten months and eighteen days from the date of expiry of limitation. The instant proceeding relates to the financial year April, 2015 to March, 2016. Mr. Vinoy Shroff, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the demand-cum-show cause notice is without jurisdiction being beyond the period of limitation. Apart from that petitioner has taken other grounds on facts and law which have not been duly considered by the adjudicating authority. The appellate authority has dismissed the appeal only on the ground of limitation without adverting to the merits of the matter. There is a forum of appeal before the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT, for short) under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to approach the learned CESTAT after complying the requirement of pre-deposit against the order in appeal dated 23.08.2024. Mr. Paramartha Datta, learned counsel for the respondents- revenue, does not object to this prayer. In that view of the matter, without going into the merits, the instant petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned CESTAT within a period of two weeks from today. Needless to say, it is open for the petitioner to take all grounds of law and facts as are available to him including the explanation for the delay, if any, for approaching the learned CESTAT. Let it be made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the parties. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (BISWAJIT PALIT),J (APARESH KUMAR SINGH), CJ Munna