2024 (8) TMI 582 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - service of notice - petitioner had no notice of the proceeding, as all notices were uploaded in the drop down menu of the dashboard under the tab additional notices of the portal, though ordinarily the same are required to be uploaded under the menu view notices and orders - challenge to order u/s 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Although the petitioner complains of violation of principles of natural justice, it is found that the order had been passed on 11th December 2023. The order appears to have been uploaded in the portal, though under the additional notices drop down menu. Although, the petitioner claims that the petitioner had no notice or knowledge with regard to the aforesaid order and the petitioner had only been able to ascertain the same in the last week of May 2024 when the respondent no. 3 had brought the factum of passing of the aforesaid order to the notice of the petitioner by a telephonic call, since, the notice/order had admittedly been uploaded on the portal, without going into the controversy at this stage, whether uploading of notice/order under the additional notices drop down menu constitute adequate service in terms of Section 169(1)(d) of the said Act, by reasons of an alternate remedy in the form of an appeal being available, the petitioner should approach the appellate authority. The petitioner is permitted to prefer the appeal before the appellate authority within 30 days - petition disposed off..

Summary

Issues:
Challenging order under WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 for tax period July 2017 to March 2018. Allegation of violation of principles of natural justice due to notice not received in proper menu. Delay in filing writ petition.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 for the tax period July 2017 to March 2018. The petitioner claimed that notices regarding the proceeding were uploaded in the incorrect menu of the portal, leading to a lack of notice. The petitioner argued that the opportunity for personal hearing was granted before the time to file a response had expired, rendering the proceedings invalid. The respondents contended that the order was passed on 11th December 2023, and the writ petition was filed on 11th June 2024 without any explanation for the delay.

The court acknowledged the petitioner's complaint of a violation of natural justice but noted that the order had been uploaded in the portal, although in the wrong menu. Despite the petitioner's claim of discovering the order late, the court did not delve into the adequacy of service at this stage. The court suggested that since an appeal was available as an alternate remedy, the petitioner should approach the appellate authority. However, due to the peculiar facts of the case, the court permitted the petitioner to file an appeal within 30 days.

The court directed that if the petitioner files an appeal within the specified period along with an explanation for the delay, the appellate authority should consider condoning the delay and hear the appeal on merits within 8 weeks from the date of filing, subject to other formalities. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions, emphasizing that all parties should act based on the server copy of the order downloaded from the Court's official website.