Case Law Details
Sanjay Gupta Vs Sales Tax Officer Class II/Avato (Delhi High Court)
In the case of Sanjay Gupta vs. Sales Tax Officer Class II/Avato, the Delhi High Court set aside an order dated 15.04.2024 issued under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The order was based on a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 08.12.2023, which was uploaded under the “View Additional Notices & Orders” section on the GST portal. The petitioner argued that the SCN should have been placed under the “View Notices & Orders” section, making it more accessible. The High Court referred to previous judgments, including M/s. ACE Cardiopathy Solutions Private Ltd. vs. Union of India, where it was determined that uploading notices under “Additional Notices” did not constitute sufficient service under Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. The GST authorities have since redesigned the portal to group both categories under one heading. However, the SCN in question was issued before this redesign. As a result, the court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the concerned authority for fresh adjudication. The petitioner was granted two weeks to respond to the SCN, and the authority is directed to consider the response and provide a hearing before making a decision.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 15.04.2024 (hereafter the impugned order) passed under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the DGST Act) pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 08.12.2023 (hereafter the impugned SCN).
2. The impugned SCN was uploaded on the portal in the category of ‘View Additional Notices & Orders’, which the petitioner claims was not easily accessible. It is contended that the show cause notices were required to be placed under the category of ‘View Notices & Orders’ but the same was not done.
3. The issue involved in the present petition is covered by earlier decisions of this Court, including in M/s. ACE Cardiopathy Solutions Private Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.: Neutral Citation No.2024:DHC:4108-DB.
4. In the said decision, this Court had rejected the contention that uploading of the notices under the heading ‘Additional Notices’ would be sufficient service in terms of Section 169 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The relevant extract of the said decision is set out below :-
“4. Learned counsel for respondent submits that in terms of Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, uploading of a notice on the portal is sufficient compliance with regard to intimation to the taxpayer.
5. We are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel, reference may be had to the judgment of the High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 26457/2023, titled M/s East Coast Constructions and Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) dated 11-9-2023, wherein the High Court of Madras has noticed that communications are placed under the heading of “View Notices and Orders” and “View Additional Notices and Orders”. The Madras High Court had directed the respondents to address the issue arising out of posting of information under two separate headings. As per the petitioner, the Menu “View Additional Notices and Orders” were under the heading of “User Services” and not under the heading “View Notices and Orders”.
5. The GST Authorities have addressed the issue and have re-designed the portal to ensure that ‘View Notices’ tab and ‘View Additional Notices’ tab are placed adjacent to one another and under one heading.
6. Admittedly, the impugned SCN was issued before the portal was redesigned.
7. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
8. The matter is remanded to the concerned authority to adjudicate the impugned SCN afresh. The petitioner is at liberty to file a response to the impugned SCN within a period of two weeks from date.
9. The concerned authority shall adjudicate the impugned SCN after considering the petitioner’s response and after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
10. The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending applications also stand disposed of.
Also Read:
Delhi HC Sets Aside Order Rejecting GST Appeal Due to Technical Glitches on GST Portal
Portal Access Issue: Delhi HC Directs Re-Adjudication for GST Registration Cancellation
Madras HC Sets Aside GST Assessment Order Citing Technical Glitches on Portal
Improper uploading of SCN on GST portal: Delhi HC directs re-adjudication
Author Bio
