9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) of APGST Rules 2017. The conspectus of the facts and law shows that the explanation offered by the petitioner against the first ground of dismissal as plausible and tenable. So far as, the second ground of rejection is concerned a perusal of copy of the challan filed along with material papers shows that the petitioner made a pre-deposit of 10% of the demanded tax on 25.02.2022 i.e., at the time of manual filing of the appeal. Therefore, it can be said that the said requirement was also complied. Thus, the 1st respondent ought to have admitted the appeal filed in electronic form instead of rejecting the same under the impugned endorsement. The impugned endorsement dated 09.09.2022 passed by the 1st respondent is set aside with a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessment Order on 02.01.2022 itself, but as immediately the Assessment Order was not uploaded on the official website, he could not present the appeal in electronic form and thereby following Rule 108 of CGST Rules, he preferred the appeal in manual form on 28.02.2022. He further submit that subsequently the petitioner received notice vide GST Spl. No. ELR/133/2021-22, dated 16.08.2022 from 1st respondent informing him that, since the e-appeal was not filed and only physical copies of the appeal were filed the petitioner should appear before the 1st respondent on 27.08.2022. Learned counsel would submit that since the said notice was received by him subsequent to the date of hearing, the petitioner submitted his detailed representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal in manual form on 28.02.2022. The factum of non-uploading of the Assessment Order dated 02.01.2022 on official website is not disputed. In that view, the reason given by the petitioner for filing the appeal in manual form can be accepted. Subsequently, a notice was issued on 16.08.2022 by the 1st respondent directing the petitioner to appear before him on 27.08.2022 and the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 06.09.2022 stating that in interregnum period the Assessment Order was uploaded on the official website and the appeal in electronic form was filed on 01.09.2022. This explanation also seems to be plausible as subsequently the copy of the Assessment Order was uploaded and thereby the petitioner has filed e-app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
