K.U. Niyas Vs Assistant Commissioner (Kerala High Court)
In the case of K.U. Niyas vs. Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner challenged demand-cum-recovery notices under the GST Act, arguing that the assessment orders for April 2018 and May 2018 to May 2019 were not properly served. The petitioner claimed that he became aware of the orders only after receiving the demand notices, prompting him to file returns within 30 days to seek withdrawal of the assessment orders under Section 62 of the GST Act. However, the respondents contended that the orders had been uploaded on the GST portal on 25.11.2019 and 27.11.2019, making them effectively served under Section 169 of the GST Act, which considers communication through email and the GST portal as valid service. Since the petitioner did not file returns within 30 days from the portal upload date but only after receiving the demand notices, he could not claim the benefit of withdrawal of the orders.
The Kerala High Court ruled that the petitioner’s delay in filing returns invalidated his claim under Section 62 of the GST Act. The Court held that the assessment orders were properly served through the GST portal and email, making them legally binding. As a result, the petition challenging the assessment orders and demand notices was dismissed. However, considering the petitioner’s request for time to file an appeal, the Court granted a six-week stay on recovery proceedings, allowing him to seek remedy before the appellate authority.
