Order liable to be set aside due to technical issues in GST Portal

[CA Bimal Jain]

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/S. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTIONS AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER-FINANCE S. SURESH VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) NUNGAMBAKKAM - 2023 (10) TMI 146 - MADRAS HIGH COURT allowed the writ petition by setting aside the Impugned Order and remanded back the matter to Appellate Authority thereby holding that, the Petitioner deserves a fair chance as the Petitioner failed to acknowledge the notice issued due to issuance of notice in different option on GST dashboard. The High Court also directed the Revenue Department to address the issues arising out of hosting information in the Menu in the Dashboard for "View Additional Notices and Orders" when already there is another drop Menu for "View Notices and Orders", which was all along since inception and used for communicating notices in various forms and orders.

Facts:

East Coast Constructions and Industries Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated May 8, 2023, (“the Impugned Order”) passed by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) as the Petitioner did not reply to the notices issued vide Form GST DRC-01A and Form GST DRC-01.

Aggrieved by the Impugned Order, the Petitioner filed a writ petition contending that, the Petitioner failed to notice the notices in Form GST DRC-01A and Form GST DRC-01. Earlier, the inception of GST, the notices/communications were hosted in “View Notices and Orders”. However, as of now, the Respondent has started hosting the notices/communications in “View Additional Notices and Orders”.

Issue:

Whether the Order is liable to be set aside due to technical issues in GST Portal?

Held:

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/S. EAST COAST CONSTRUCTIONS AND INDUSTRIES LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER-FINANCE S. SURESH VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) NUNGAMBAKKAM - 2023 (10) TMI 146 - MADRAS HIGH COURT held as under:

• Noted that, the Petitioner deserves a fair chance to address the discrepancy pointed out in Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-3B, as pointed out in Form ASMT-10.
• Opined that, the Court is not inclined to direct the Petitioner to approach the Respondent Appellate Authority as the matter requires a proper consideration.
• Held that, the Impugned Order is set aside and case is remitted back to the Respondent authority for passing fresh orders on merit in accordance with law within a period of three months.
• Directed that, the Respondent authority shall address the issues arising out of hosting of information in the Menu in Dashboard for "View Additional Notices and Orders" when already there is another drop Menu for "View Notices and Orders", which was all along since inception used for communicating notices in various forms and orders

Our Comments:

Recently, the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/S HARBIR SINGH CONTRACTOR AND ANOTHER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS - 2023 (12) TMI 824 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT allowed the writ petition thereby holding that the Petitioner is entitled to remedy when damage is caused to the Assessee due to inadvertent machine errors, observing that, the procedural laws are brought to life by the rules which are enabled to work efficiently through machine process.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])