2026 (2) TMI 825 - HC - GST

Service by email to the taxpayer's provided address upheld; agent negligence does not justify condoning delay in GST appeal.

Challenge concerned condonation of delay to file an appeal under the Central GST appellate remedy and writ interference with an assessment order where ... Service by electronic communication/email - non-receipt due to agent/chartered accountant's negligence - condonation of delay in filing statutory appeal - limited scope of judicial interference under Article 226 - notices uploaded on GST Portal (Additional Notices and Orders Tab) - HELD THAT:- In the present case, it is admitted by petitioner that notices as well as impugned order dated 28.08.2024 had been sent on the e-mail address, which was made available by petitioner to the Department. Case set up is that CA of petitioner was negligent in not bringing this to notice of petitioner. Once the Department has discharged its duty, show cause notices were duly served on e-mail address, so provided by petitioner. There is no ground for interference. It is specifically mentioned in impugned order dated 28.08.2024 that firstly ASMT-10 dated 17.12.2021 was issued. No reply was submitted on behalf of petitioner and thereafter show cause notice in Form DRC-01 was issued on 22.05.2024. Subsequent thereto, three more opportunities were afforded with the matter being adjourned each time. It is further noted that despite due opportunity being afforded neither any reply was filed nor amount in question deposited. No merit in the arguments raised for petitioner that additionally the show cause notice(s), intimation and orders were uploaded on ‘Additional Notices and Orders Tab’ on the GST Portal, due to which the same did not come to knowledge of petitioner. This is clearly an afterthought and with reference to certain writ petitions which are now pending before this Court in this respect. No ground is made out for any interference at this stage. Issues: Whether delay in filing appeal against order dated 28.08.2024 should be condoned and the petitioner permitted to file appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and whether impugned order should be interfered with in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.Analysis: The petition asserts non-receipt of show cause notices and impugned order on ground that notices were sent to an e-mail account accessed by the petitioner's chartered accountant who allegedly failed to inform the petitioner, and that notices/orders were uploaded on the GST portal. The statutory framework includes service of notices on the e-mail address provided by the taxpayer and proceedings under Section 73(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and corresponding Haryana statute, and the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The factual record in the impugned order shows issuance of earlier assessment notice (ASMT-10), failure to reply, issuance of show cause notice in Form DRC-01, multiple adjournments and opportunities, and absence of any reply or deposit by the petitioner. Interference under Article 226 is confined to exceptional and extraordinary circumstances; mere negligence of an agent (chartered accountant) or subsequent assertions about portal uploads do not establish such circumstances when service was effected to the e-mail address furnished by the taxpayer and opportunities were afforded but not availed.Conclusion: Petition dismissed; relief of condoning delay and permitting filing of appeal is refused and the impugned order is not interfered with.