Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit -- The proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under section 129 of the Act. The petitioner filed appeal. The Appellate Authority issued a notice of defect, on three defects (i) limitation, (ii) failure to remove the pre-deposit and (iii) court fee payable towards the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund had not been paid. The Petitioner challenged the order rejecting the appeal as defective. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that as far as the limitation period is concerned, this Court has specifically observed in judgment that the Appellate Authority must exclude the time spent by the petitioner before this Court. The Government Pleader submitted that the direction of this Court is not seen considered by the Appellate Authority and since the said aspect has not been considered, the matter may require a remand. The court observed that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and a reconsideration of the matter is necessary.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed that if the petitioner files a statutory appeal, it meets the ends of justice if the Appellate Authority, while revoking limitation, excludes the time the petitioner spent here in this writ petition. As far as the mandatory pre-deposit is concerned, since the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner is alleged to have been invoked, the said matter ought to have been considered by the Appellate Authority. Once the entire tax and penalty imposed on the petitioner and secured by the Bank Guarantee was fully satisfied by invoking the guarantee, there cannot be any insistence of a further payment contemplated under section 107(6)(b). Since the learned counsel for the petitioner has offered to pay the court fee towards Kerala Legal Benefit Fund, such an opportunity can also be granted. If the petitioner deposits the court fee within 30 days, the respondents shall reconsider the application, and pass orders restoring the appeal back to file and consider the appeal on merits.