The issue that arises for consideration is whether this Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is empowered to condone the delay beyond the maximum time limit stipulated under Section 107 of the GST Act. This court refer the matter to a Division Bench of this Court.

The issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was adhered to by the respondents or not. Having passed the impugned order beyond the period of seven days from the date of service of notice on the petitioner which is contrary to Section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, the impugned orders have to be necessarily quashed and the writ petitions will have to be allowed.

The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. This court quash and set aside the impugned orders.

The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. This court quash and set aside the impugned order.

The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. As such, on this short ground alone, we dispose of the present writ petition in the following mutually agreeable terms.

The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. This court quashed and set aside the impugned order.

While exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution this Court can examine the factual circumstances and grant appropriate relief as the appellate remedy is a very valuable remedy since the appellate authority can re-appreciate the factual position. Thus, for such reason, this court is inclined to exercise discretion. In a result, the appeal is allowed, the order passed in the writ petition is set aside and consequently, the writ petition is allowed.

The order passed in the writ petition is set aside and the writ petition is allowed and that portion of the order passed by the appellate authority on the second issue is quashed.

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to refund the eligible excess ITC amount for the month of January to March 2018, based on the petitioner`s application in accordance with law within the time frame. The respondent is directed to consider the request of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.

The order of cancellation of registration is set aside and the appellant is granted 10 days’ time from the date of receipt of the server copy of this judgment and order to pay the entire tax due together with interest and other charges, if any and if the same is complied with, the assessing authority shall restore the registration granted to the appellant in accordance with law

This court consider it apposite to allow the writ petition and remit the matter back to the primary authority i.e., 1st respondent to re-consider the case of the petitioner and after affording a personal hearing to him, pass an appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously.

The jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be exercised for condoning delay in filing an appeal which was otherwise time-barred. It will be open for the petitioner to file an appeal with an application for condonation of delay in filing such appeal explaining the circumstances which are available to suggest to the appellate authority that the petitioner was prevented by way of a sufficient cause in filing such an appeal.