GST grievance redressal mechanism broadened with website disclosure, nodal contacts, periodic status updates and form uploads

The Delhi High Court directed that the GST IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism must cover individual grievances relating to GST Network functioning and not be confined to a narrow class of portal issues. It further required wider publication of the mechanism's expanded scope, along with nodal officers' contact details on the GST, Delhi GST and CBIC websites, and fortnightly disclosure of grievance status, action taken, reasons for pendency or rejection, and expected resolution time. The Court also recorded that the list of operationalised forms on the GST Network should be uploaded within the stipulated period, strengthening accessibility, transparency and redress for taxpayers.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism under the GST regime should be made available for individual grievances relating to GST Network functioning and not confined to a narrow class of portal issues; (ii) whether the respondents should publicise the nodal officers, broaden the mechanism's scope on the website, and provide regular status updates on grievances; (iii) whether the list of operationalised forms on the GST Network should be uploaded.

Issue (i): Whether the IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism under the GST regime should be made available for individual grievances relating to GST Network functioning and not confined to a narrow class of portal issues.

Analysis: The circular governing the mechanism was read as covering portal-related difficulties affecting taxpayers, and the Court accepted that the mechanism was not to be confined only to TRAN-1 related grievances. It was noted that even individual complaints may reflect issues affecting many similarly situated taxpayers and therefore deserve consideration within the redressal framework.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the petitioners, and the mechanism was directed to be treated as covering individual grievances relating to GST Network functioning.

Issue (ii): Whether the respondents should publicise the nodal officers, broaden the mechanism's scope on the website, and provide regular status updates on grievances.

Analysis: The Court directed wider dissemination of the enlarged scope of the grievance mechanism, along with publication of the e-mail IDs and telephone numbers of nodal officers on the GST website, Delhi GST website, and CBIC website. It further required compilation of grievances received at the nodal level and fortnightly disclosure of the status, action taken, reasons for pendency or rejection, and likely time for resolution, so that the process remained transparent and effective.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the petitioners, and the respondents were directed to make the mechanism public and transparent through website-based disclosure and periodic status reporting.

Issue (iii): Whether the list of operationalised forms on the GST Network should be uploaded.

Analysis: The respondents agreed to upload the list of operationalised forms, and the Court recorded that the exercise should be completed within the stipulated time.

Conclusion: The issue was resolved in favour of the petitioners, with a direction to upload the list within the specified period.

Final Conclusion: The petition was disposed of with directions aimed at strengthening the GST grievance redressal framework, widening its practical scope, and improving transparency and accessibility for taxpayers.

---