2026 (4) TMI 852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se jurisdiction against the impugned order, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, primarily for the reason that the appellant has chosen to approach this Court nearly three years later. 2. Sri. Asokan T.A.-learned counsel for the appellant, argued that his client had committed no error in having waited for nearly 2 ½ years to challenge the impugned order because, she was not aware of the same, it having not been communicated to her. He pointed out that, even going by the admitted facts, the order in question was uploaded by the Tax Authorities in the Common Portal under the ambit of Section 146 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short "CGST Act"); but that since she is a proprietor "engaged in a very de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ention of the appellant is that she has not been communicated "the impugned order by the authorities as required under Section 107 of the CGST Act" (sic). Sri. Asokan T.A., reiterately argued that, as per the afore Section, orders have to be communicated to the assessee in the manner as stipulated; and therefore, that, when it has not been so done, she cannot be found guilty of latches. 6. However, as rightly argued by Sri. Mohammed Rafeq, in Sunil Kumar (supra), a learned Division Bench has dealt with the same issue, to answer it affirmatively in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 thereof, which are as under:- "4. Before us, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant Sri. Bobby John, that the notification of the portal i....