2020 (8) TMI 628 - HC - GST

Court dismisses Writ Petition challenging GST demand notices for late return filing; emphasizes timely compliance

K.U. NIYAS Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THE STATE OF KERALA, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX

The court dismissed the Writ Petition challenging demand cum recovery notices under the GST Act as the petitioner failed to file returns within the ... Principles of Natural Justice - mode of service / communication of orders - It is the case of the petitioner that the assessment orders were not served on him but, immediately on receipt of the demand notices, he took the necessary steps and filed returns for the said period, within thirty days from the date of receipt of the demand notices, so as to get the benefit of withdrawal of the assessment orders - HELD THAT:- As per Section 169(c) and (d) of the GST Act the service of any communication to the e-mail address provided by an assessee at the time of registration, as also by making available the communication in the common portal of the department, is to be treated as an effective communication under the statute - the petitioner, therefore, cannot wish away the fact that the assessment orders were brought to his notice on 25.11.2019 and 27.11.2019 respectively. Petition dismissed. Issues:Challenge to demand cum recovery notices under the GST Act based on assessment orders not served on the petitioner, timely filing of returns for withdrawal of assessment orders, effective communication of assessment orders via web portal, benefit of withdrawal under Section 62 of the GST Act, belated filing of returns, dismissal of Writ Petition, recovery proceedings, stay on recovery for appeals.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the demand cum recovery notices issued under the GST Act, contending that the assessment orders were not served on him. The assessment orders were passed in November 2019 for the period April 2018 to May 2019. The petitioner claimed to have filed returns promptly upon receiving the demand notices to avail the benefit of withdrawal of assessment orders as per Section 62 of the GST Act.The respondents clarified that the assessment orders were uploaded on the department's web portal on the same dates they were passed. Section 62 of the GST Act allowed the assessee to file returns within 30 days from the date of receipt of orders passed on best judgment basis to withdraw the orders. However, the petitioner failed to file returns within 30 days from the date of uploading the assessment orders on the web portal but filed them within 30 days from the receipt of demand notices following the assessment orders.The court considered the provisions of Section 169(c) and (d) of the GST Act, which deem communication to the e-mail address provided by the assessee at the time of registration and making it available on the common portal as effective communication. The court noted that the petitioner was aware of the assessment orders on the dates they were uploaded. Since the returns were filed more than 30 days after the service of orders via the web portal, the petitioner was not entitled to the benefit of withdrawal under Section 62 of the GST Act. Consequently, the Writ Petition challenging the assessment orders and demand notices was dismissed.Acknowledging the petitioner's intention to appeal against the assessment orders, the court directed a stay on recovery proceedings for six weeks. This stay aimed to allow the petitioner time to move the appellate authority through statutory appeals during the interim period.In conclusion, the court upheld the validity of the demand cum recovery notices under the GST Act, emphasizing the importance of timely compliance with statutory provisions for withdrawal of assessment orders. The petitioner's failure to file returns within the stipulated period led to the dismissal of the Writ Petition, with a temporary stay granted for pursuing appeals against the assessment orders.