Mere delay in uploading demand order in Form DRC-07 on GST Portal didn’t make action time barred if served via email

Suresh Kumar Vs Commissioner CGST Delhi North (Delhi High Court)

Conclusion: When there were 650 noticees, obviously, the generation of DRC-07 for each of the noticees could take some reasonable time so long as the order had been communicated through e-mail or post or other modes as contained in Section 169. Accordingly, the delay in uploading Form DRC-07 or the order on the portal would not make the order barred by limitation.

Held: Assessee claimed that the limitation period for passing a demand order came to an end on 5th February, 2025. It was submitted that though the impugned order was passed on 1st February, 2025, it was uploaded along with the DRC-07 on the GST portal only on 19th February, 2025. Thus, assessee argued that the demand was time barred. On appeal. It was held that the order itself was dated 1^st February, 2025. Secondly, the e-mail which had been handed over showed that the impugned order had been communicated either to assessee or to his Chartered Accountant. The said email was also served through email on several other Noticees against whom the demands were raised.  Thereafter, Form DRC-07 was uploaded on 19^th February, 2025. Usually, there was a gap between the passing of the order and the uploading of the Form DRC-07 for each of the parties. In the present case, it was noticed that there were a total of 650 noticees and allegation pertained to fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, ‘ITC’) to the tune of Rs.173 crores. When there were 650 noticees, obviously, the generation of DRC-07 for each of the noticees could take some reasonable time so long as the order had been communicated through e-mail or post or other modes as contained in Section 169 of the CGST Act. Accordingly, the delay in uploading Form DRC-07 or the order on the portal would not make the order barred by limitation. Prima-facie this Court was of the opinion that e-mail dated 4^th February, 2025 was sufficient mode of service. However, the impugned order being an appealable order, assessee was permitted to challenge the same by an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. In the said appeal, assessee was also permitted to raise the issue of limitation. Let the appeals challenging the impugned orders be filed by 30^th September, 2025 along with the requisite pre-deposit. If the same were filed by the said date, they should not be dismissed on the ground of limitation and should be adjudicated on merits.