Filing of GST Appeal Electronically or Otherwise Defined by HC

Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (High Court Andhra Pradesh)

The Counsel for the petitioner submits that since the Assessment Order copies were received manually, there was no occasion for the petitioner to submit grounds of appeal electronically as he has to file the order copies and other relevant documents along with the grounds of appeal. Further, Rule 108 of APGST Rules, 2017 gives liberty to an appellant to file an appeal with required forms and relevant documents “either electronically or otherwise as notified by the Chief Commissioner”. Since the Chief Commissioner has, as of now, not notified any particular form for filing appeal, the appellant is at liberty to file the appeal by choosing either mode. He further argued that in fact the petitioner tried to upload the appeal electronically through the GST portal, but as the portal did not open, he had resorted to manual mode and the same was accepted by the office of the 3^rd respondent vide acknowledgment dated 28.06.2018. In spite of the same, he lamented, the appeal was rejected on the sole ground that it was not filed electronically.

Held by High Court

The words “electronically” and “otherwise” are co-related with the two conjunctions i.e., “either” and “or”. Grammatically, these two conjunctions are used in co-relation with some words to indicate the alternativity or choice between the two persons, things, or events. In the instant case, the word “electronically” is prefixed with the conjunction “either” and the word “otherwise” is prefixed with the conjunction “or”. From this usage, what can be deduced is that the mode of filing is a choice between electronic and other form (usually, manual form), as may be notified by the Chief Commissioner. Since admittedly notification is yet to be given by the Chief Commissioner, appeal can be filed in either manner. The mandate of the word “shall” in Rule 108(1) applies to Form GST APL-01 but not to the word “electronically”. In my view, if the word “shall” was intended to govern the word “electronically” also, the word “either” would not have been posited immediately before the word “electronically” because the phrases “shall electronically” and “either electronically” are oxymorons.

Secondly, referring to Rule 108(2) and Rule 26 of the APGST Rules, learned Government Pleader argued that the grounds of appeal and the form of verification as contained in FORM GST APL-01 shall be signed as specified in Rule 26. Whereas Rule 26 specifies the method of authentication of applications and other documents including “appeals” saying that the documents including appeals shall be submitted electronically with a digital signature certificate or through e-signature as specified under the provisions of Information and Technology Act, 2000 or verified by any other mode of signature or verification as notified by the Chief Commissioner in that behalf. Learned Government Pleader thus argued that since Rule 26 specifies that appeals and other documents shall be submitted electronically with a digital signature certificate or e-signature, it should be understood that appeal under Rule 108 shall be filed only electronically.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.