GST Update No 298 on cancellation order uploaded without signature

Time and again, the revenue authorities are bashed by the Court of law for not following the adequate procedure of law and acting judiciously. Further, the negligence on the part of tax officers in serving the notice properly increases the miseries of the taxpayers. This lacuna on the part of departmental officers is never taken seriously because of which the battle of litigation is faced by the business communities. Recently, one more case on the same lines was reported before Bombay High Court in the case of RAMANI SUCHIT MALUSHTE V/S UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. The decision imparted in this case is the subject matter of discussion of our present update.

The petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the appeal was not preferred within a period of 3 months as prescribed under Section 107 of CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the aggrieved person can prefer an appeal to the Appellate Authority within 3 months from the date of communication of the order. Further, as per Chapter III of the Rules, it requires the order to be authenticated by digital signature or E-signature or by any other mode of signature. The form requires the order to be signed by the officer before passing the order.

The petitioner submitted that the order is merely uploaded on the GST Portal without any signature. The signature was affixed on 19.05.2021 when the petitioner was required to get it attested for filing of appeal. Therefore, the limitation period for filing the appeal against cancellation order dated 14.11.2019 never initiated. The limitation period shall begin only from 19.05.2021.

The respondent not denied that any order passed by respondent requires to be digitally signed and certified. It was further argued that the petitioner cannot take stand of not receiving the signed copy because the unsigned order was received by petitioner electronically.

The Court held that in the present case the present order is not digitally signed and hence, is not issued as per Rule 26 of CGST Rules, 2017. Therefore, the time limit of filing of appeal shall begin only when the digitally signed order is available. It was stated that the if the arguments of the respondent are considered, then the rules which prescribe specifically that digital signature has to be put will be rendered redundant. However, if the digital signature is not affixed by the issuing authority, then the order will have no effect in the eyes of law. Therefore, the submissions of petitioner were accepted that the period of limitation shall commence from 14.11.2019. The impugned order was quashed and set aside and the case was remanded back to be decided on the merits.

The above decision is yet another example showcasing that negligence on the part of departmental officers can result into heavy litigation cost to the taxpayers. Recently, there had been judicial rulings wherein the notice was not served on the GST portal or on e-mail of the registered persons. To illustrate, in the case of NAVYA FOODS (P) LTD. V/S SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT, it was held that time period to file appeal starts from date of uploading of order. We have also prepared update on the same having serial No. 296 dated 28.09.2022. Similar decision was also delivered in the case of M/S PEE BEE ENTERPRISES V/S ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BY KERALA HIGH COURT on which we have prepared update 124/2020-21 dated 27.8.2020. It is high time that the revenue authorities should streamline the process of adjudication and issuing of show cause notice adequately so as to avoid any unwanted litigations.

Comments

GST Update No 298 on cancellation order uploaded without signature

Post a Comment

Query