Hemanta Kumar Kisan vs. CT And GST Officer, Jharsuguda

Facts

The Petitioner, Hemanta Kumar Kisan, a registered dealer, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 9th September, 2021, passed by the CT & GST Officer, Jharsuguda Circle. The Petitioner's grievance was that the impugned order treated him as an unregistered dealer, preventing him from filing an appeal. The Petitioner also noted that the GST portal did not reflect the impugned order, further complicating matters. The Opposite Parties, represented by the Addl. Standing Counsel, submitted that the impugned order assigned a Temporary GSTIN number to the Petitioner, and the appeal should be filed using this temporary number. They stated that once the appeal is entertained and the order set aside, the portal would be updated.

Held

The Court did not entertain the writ petition directly. Instead, it addressed the procedural issue raised by the Petitioner. The Court held that the Petitioner could file an appeal against the impugned order using the Temporary GSTIN number assigned to him in the order itself. The Court directed that if the appeal is filed by 19th December, 2022, along with an application for condonation of delay, the Appellate Authority should consider it on its merits. The delay would be explained by the pendency of the present writ petition. The Court explicitly clarified that it had not expressed any view on the merits of the impugned order or the Petitioner's case. The operative direction was to allow the Petitioner to pursue his appellate remedy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner, a registered dealer, can file an appeal against an order that erroneously treats him as an unregistered dealer, particularly when the GST portal does not reflect the impugned order? This issue turns on the interpretation of Section 107 of the Odisha G.S.T. Act and the procedural requirements for filing an appeal. Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that since the impugned order incorrectly classified him as an unregistered dealer, he was unable to file an appeal as prescribed by law. The lack of reflection of the order on the portal exacerbated this procedural hurdle. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the Petitioner could file an appeal using the Temporary GSTIN number provided in the impugned order. They argued that this was the correct procedural path, and upon successful appeal, the portal would be updated.