Case Law Details
Optum Global Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Optum Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana [C.W.P. NO. 26273 of 2023 dated November 22, 2023] set aside the Impugned Order for dismissal of appeal on the ground that the appeal was filed manually. Also, Rule 108 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (“the HGST Rules”) has been amended vide Notification No. 38/2023 dated August 4, 2023, wherein it is mandatory to file Appeal electronically with effect from the aforementioned date subject to the proviso stated therein.
Facts:
Optum Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) filed an appeal manually on August 31, 2020 against the order passed by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”). However, the Respondent rejected the appeal filed by the Petitioner vide order dated November 22, 2023 (“the Impugned Order”) on the ground that the Appeal was filed by the Petitioner manually.
Aggrieved by the impugned order, the Petitioner filed the writ petition contending that as per Rule 108 of the HGST Rules, the appeal can be filed either electronically or otherwise as may be notified by the Commissioner,
Issue:
Whether Appeal filed manually by the Petitioner is valid?
Held:
The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of C.W.P. NO. 26273 of 2023 held as under:
- Relying upon the judgement of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Go Daddy India Domains and Hosting Services Pvt Ltd v. State of Haryana [CWP-9051-2023 dated April 29, 2023] and judgement of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Ali Cotton Mill v. Appellate Joint Commissioner [WP No. 3308 of 2021 dated February 11, 2021] held that filing of appeal manually is a highly technical ground for dismissing the appeal and therefore set aside the Impugned Order and directed the Revenue Department to hear the appeal on merits.
- Further Noted that, the Rule 108 of the HGST Rules has been amended vide Notification No. 38/2023 dated August 4, 2023 wherein it is mandatory to file Appeal electronically with effect from the aforementioned date subject to the proviso stated therein.
- Held that, the Impugned Order is set aside.
- Directed that, the matter be remanded to Respondent Appellate Authority for fresh orders on merits.
Conclusion: The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s ruling in Optum’s case offers relief to taxpayers facing dismissal of GST appeals due to manual filing. By emphasizing the technicality of such grounds, the court quashed the dismissal orders and directed the Appellate Authority to reconsider the appeal on merits. This decision, aligned with earlier judgments, highlights the need for a balanced approach in interpreting GST rules. As the legal landscape evolves, taxpayers should stay abreast of amendments and court decisions, ensuring compliance with GST regulations while navigating the complexities of the appeals process.
Relevant Provision:
Rule 108 of the HGST Rules:
“Rule 108. Appeal to the Appellate Authority.-
(1) An appeal to the Appellate Authority under sub-section (1) of section 107 shall be filed in FORM GST APL-01, along with the relevant documents, electronically, and a provisional acknowledgement shall be issued to the appellant immediately.
Provided that an appeal to the Appellate Authority may be filed manually in FORM GST APL-01, along with the relevant documents, only if-
(i) the Commissioner has so notified, or
(ii) the same cannot be filed electronically due to non-availability of the decision or order to be appealed against on the common portal,
and in such case, a provisional acknowledgement shall be issued to the appellant immediately.”
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. Challenge in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 01.03.2023 (Annexuxre P-1) whereby the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals)-cum-Appellate Authority), Faridabad has rejected the appeal being not maintainable on account of the fact that it had been presented in a manner by filing it offline (manual) on 31.08.2020 against the order dated 04.06.2020. The said appeal was filed against the rejection of the refund for Rs.32,69,309/- for the period from April, 2018 to June, 2018. Reliance has been placed upon Rule 108 of the Haryana Goods & Service Tax Rules, 2017 (in short ‘the Rules’) which provide that the appeal can be filed either electronically or otherwise, as may be notified by the Commissioner.
2. It has been brought to our notice that the said Rule was amended on 04.08.2023 and the appeals have been filed earlier. It has also been further brought to our notice that a co-ordinate Bench in CWP-9051-2023, Go Daddy India Domains and Hosting Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Haryana, decided on 29.04.2023 (Annexure P-11) came to the conclusion that it is a highly technical ground for dismissing the appeal and set aside the said order and issued directions to hear the appeal on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Reliance was placed upon the judgment ofAndhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 3308 of 2021, Ali Cotton Mill vs. Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), 2022 (56) G.S.T.L., 270 (A.P.) (Annexure P-12).
3. A perusal of the said judgment would also go on to show that the wording of the Rule had been taken into consideration since it is provided “electronically or otherwise” and, therefore, the manual filing as such has also been accepted.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
6. Keeping in view the above, we see no tangible reason to pass a different order. Accordingly, the order dated 01.03.2023 (Annexure P-1) is quashed. The appeal is restored on the Board of the Appellate Authority, which shall proceed to decide the appeal on merits.
7. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
****
(Author can be reached at [email protected])
Author Bio
