The Allahabad High Court restored a trader’s appeal against a Section 129 detention order, holding that merits should not be throttled on a technicality when illness was shown by medical certificates.
The Allahabad High Court has condoned a delay of just over five days beyond the 120 days allowed for an appeal under Section 107 of the UPGST Act, setting aside an order that rejected the appeal and the delay condonation application without reasons. [Bansal Sanitary Store v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2026-juristway.com-3312-HC(Allahabad)-GST]
Justice Vikas Budhwar decided the writ petition on the record, with the consent of the parties. The Aligarh tiles trader’s goods, covered by tax invoices and an e-way bill for purchases from a Gujarat supplier, were intercepted, and a detention order in Form GST MOV‑06 was passed under Section 129(1) on 3 Jun 2023.
Its appeal, filed on 7 Oct 2023 with an application for condonation of delay, was rejected on 26 Sep 2024 on the footing that the appellate authority had no power to condone delay beyond 120 days. The petitioner pleaded that it had suffered from medical ailments from 1 Sep 2023 to 6 Oct 2023, had attached medical certificates, and noted that the order did not say the certificates were false. It confined its challenge to the appellate order.
The Standing Counsel argued that the petitioner could have engaged someone else to file the appeal and that the appellate authority has no power to condone delay beyond 120 days. The Court held that the appellate order was bereft of reasons and that “the merits of the matter are not required to be throttled on the ground of technicality”, given the medical ground supported by certificates.
The appellate order was set aside, the appeal restored to its number and the delay condoned. The appellate authority is to fix a date in the first week of December 2026 and pass orders by 31 Dec 2026. The Court did not enter into the merits.
2026-juristway.com-3312-HC(Allahabad)-GST
