Mahadev Transport and Contractors Vs Assistant Commissioner and Others (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that petition cannot be entertained since the inordinate delay, in approaching the court, has not been satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, writ in GST matter dismissed.
Facts- The present writ is preferred by the petitioners. In all these cases petitioners, who are registered under the GST regime, have approached this Court challenging assessment orders passed against them. The main ground for challenge, in all these cases, is the lack of a Document Identification Number on the orders, passed by the assessing officers. Notably, there is significant delay in challenging these orders.
Conclusion- The contention that the registered persons/dealers were unaware of the service of the impugned orders in the portal cannot be accepted as a ground for condoning delay. Acceptance of such a plea would throw open the doors for filing of Writ Petitions against the orders which have been passed years back. In fact most of the Writ petitions in the present batch are cases where orders had been passed in the year 2023 itself. Further, the prescribed method of service of notices and orders includes service of the order through the portal being maintained by the GST Authorities. Once such a method of service has been included in the Act and Rules, the contention that such service is not sufficient service and did not give actual notice of service to the registered persons cannot be accepted.
