GST: Authority for Advance Ruling Says It Cannot Condone Delay Beyond 30 Days

The appellant, M/s Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., engaged in mining and supply of iron and manganese in Keonjhar, Odisha, held a mining lease that expired on 31 March 2020. The lease was subsequently allotted to Odisha Mining Corporation Ltd. (OMC), a State PSU. Under a deed dated 28 June 2023, certain assets such as plant, machinery, buildings, civil structures, and railway siding were transferred to OMC on an “as is where is basis.” The appellant paid GST on plant and machinery treating it as supply of goods, but considered the transfer of buildings and civil structures as sale of immovable property not liable to GST under Schedule III of the CGST Act.

However, the Odisha Authority for Advance Ruling held that the transaction amounted to a taxable supply of service under Schedule II of the CGST Act, as the appellant had effectively refrained from removing the structures against consideration. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Odisha Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling.

Issue Raised: Whether the appeal filed against the AAR ruling was maintainable when it was submitted beyond the statutory limitation period prescribed under Section 100(2) of the CGST Act.

Tribunal Ruling: The Odisha Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling dismissed the appeal as time-barred. It noted that under Section 100(2) of the CGST Act, an appeal must be filed within 30 days of communication of the ruling, extendable by another 30 days if sufficient cause is shown.

In this case, the order was communicated on 28 August 2024, while the appeal was filed on 5 May 2025—about 250 days later. The Authority held that it has no power to condone delay beyond the additional 30-day period prescribed under the Act and therefore rejected the appeal as not maintainable without examining the merits.

To Read Full Order, Download PDF Given Below