The Gujarat High Court has resolved an important interpretive dispute over the scope of Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax dated 02.11.2023, holding that the notification applies to all appeals filed before the cut-off date of 31 January 2024 — including those filed for the first time after the notification was issued — and is not confined to appeals that had previously been filed and rejected on grounds of limitation. The ruling, by a Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati in Adinath Rice Mill & Another v. Union of India & Others (R/Special Civil Application No. 14806 of 2024, decided 03.08.2026), resolves what had become a genuine ground of dispute between taxpayers and appellate authorities.
The facts are straightforward. An assessment order was passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act against the petitioner on 27.01.2023 — before 31.03.2023, making it eligible under the notification. A physical copy of the order was served on 25.03.2023. The petitioner filed a Section 107 appeal on 28.12.2023, before the 31.01.2024 cut-off, and deposited the amounts specified under paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) of the notification. The Appellate Authority nevertheless rejected the appeal on 11.06.2024 solely on grounds of limitation, taking the position that the notification applied only to appeals that had previously been rejected — not to appeals that had never been filed. Since the petitioner's appeal had not been previously rejected, the authority concluded the notification was inapplicable.
The High Court read the notification text carefully and found this interpretation untenable. The notification covers two categories of taxpayers: those who could not file an appeal within the prescribed period, and those whose appeals had been rejected on limitation grounds. The proviso to paragraph 2 further clarifies that appeals already pending before the Appellate Authority at the time the notification was issued would be deemed filed under the notification if the payment conditions were met. Reading these provisions together, the court held that the notification was plainly intended to provide a window — not merely for re-filing of rejected appeals but for first-time filing by anyone who had missed the statutory deadline. A taxpayer who filed before the 31.01.2024 cut-off satisfying the payment conditions could not be placed in a worse position than someone whose earlier-filed appeal had been rejected and who was permitted to file afresh under the notification.
There is a further point of practical importance in the ruling. The court noted that the Appellate Authority was under an obligation to take cognisance of the notification suo motu — it is a notification of the Government of India regulating the very provision under Section 107 that the authority administers, and it cannot wait for the taxpayer to point it out. The Appellate Authority's silence on the notification in its rejection order was itself a flaw. The appeal rejection was quashed and the authority directed to decide the appeal on merits within twelve weeks.
-2026-juristway.com-2143-HC(Gujarat)-GST | High Court of Gujarat | 03.08.2026