Can writ courts condone delay exceeding limitation period under GST Act? Madras High Court refers issue to division bench

A single-judge Bench of the Madras High Court has referred to a division bench, the question of whether a writ court can exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 to condone the delay in filing of appeals under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act beyond the maximum limitation period stipulated under the Act..Justice Abdul Quddhose directed the High Court Registry to place the matter before Acting Chief Justice T Raja for nominating an appropriate division bench to decide the issue..Justice Quddhose was hearing a batch of writ petitions challenging the cancellation of GST registrations under the Central Act and the Tamil Nadu GST Act.He noted that while some of the petitioners had directly approached the High Court, others had filed appeals before the GST Appellate Authority. Their appeals had been rejected on the ground that they had been filed beyond the three-month limitation period prescribed under Section 107 of the GST Act.Section 107 of the Act allows a person aggrieved by any order passed under the Central or State Act to file an appeal before the concerned Appellate Authority within three months from the date of such order.The petitioners urged the High Court to condone such delay and revoke the cancellation of their respective registrations..During the hearing, however, Justice Quddhose realised that two other single-judge benches of the High Court had previously dealt with the same question, and had given contradictory views. On November 16 last year, Justice Anita Sumanth had held in Pandidorai Sethupathi Raja v. The Superintendent of Central Tax that the Court had the power to condone such delay under extraordinary circumstances.She went on to say that it was a settled position that when statutory revisional or appellate remedies set out a limitation period for filing of remedy, and the authorities under the statute cannot traverse beyond the prescribed period. However, a writ court's jurisdiction under Article 226 was "wide" and empowered the Court to "do substantial justice, over and beyond the ken of a statutory authority." She thus allowed the petitions filed before the Court seeking quashing of GST registration, and said that there were genuine reasons for delay such as ill health, financial constraints, COVID-19 having affected business etc..The other bench, presided over by Justice M Sundar, however, held in Hemasri Enterprises v. The Appellate Authority/Deputy Commissioner that while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court did "not have the power to condone the delay" when the statutory appeal filed under Section 107 of the GST Act was beyond the maximum time limit..Justice Quddhose, therefore, said that the issue must be examined by a division bench. "Since there are two contradictory views expressed by two Hon'ble Judges of this Court, Judicial Discipline and Propriety demands that I refer the matter to a Division Bench of this Court," the order stated..[Read order]