2025 (9) TMI 1213

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. In any event, our order of 2nd September 2025 should be read along with this order. 5. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 6. The Petitioner challenges the order dated 14th November 2020 by which the Petitioner's GST registration came to be cancelled with retrospective effect. The Petitioner appealed the order dated 14th November 2020 by instituting such an Appeal in 2024. This Appeal was rejected as barred by limitation on 28th February 2025. 7. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner now points out that the impugned cancellation order dated 14th November 2020 was neither signed by the Officer who made it, nor was any digital signature affixed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h notices or certificates or orders, through digital signature certificate for through e-signature as specified under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000) or verified by any other mode of signature or verification as notified by the Board in this behalf]. 11. The above Rule came into effect from 22nd June 2017. Therefore, the contention that on 14th November 2020, there was no provision to digitally sign the correspondence issued to the taxpayer may not be correct. The contention that since an Appeal was filed, the Petitioner must have been issued a signed or a digitally signed order also cannot be accepted. There is neither any record nor any statement made on oath that a signed or digitally signed order w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority but when it refers to the order in original dated 14th November 2019 there is total silence about any digital signature being put by the issuing authority. Conveniently, respondent stated that petitioner cannot take stand of not receiving the signed copy because the unsigned order was admittedly received by petitioner electronically. However, if this stand of respondent has to be accepted, then the Rules which prescribe specifically that digital signature has to be put will be rendered redundant. In our view, unless digital signature is put by the issuing authority that order will have no effect in the eyes of law. 15. Considering the above, we declare that the order dated 14th November 2020, as it now stands, would be no order i....