Boidul Jamal vs. The State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Held

The Court held that it cannot be said that the petitioners had due knowledge of the proceedings that continued and concluded against them, as they were only served notices and the order by way of uploading them on the relevant GST portal. The Court found that the situation was similar to the one dealt with in the Sankar Agarwala case, and therefore, saw no reason to take a different view. Consequently, the impugned appellate order dated May 21, 2025, was set aside. The Court further directed that the appeal be restored to the file of the appellate authority for a fresh decision on merits. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all points before the appellate authority, including the fact that a similar demand for the financial year 2020-21 had been dropped in their own case upon considering their reply. The appellate authority was directed to decide the appeal considering all these facts in accordance with law.

Facts

The petitioner, Boidul Jamal, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated May 21, 2025, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. This appellate order dismissed the petitioner's appeal against an earlier order dated January 29, 2024, passed under Section 73 of the said Act, solely on the grounds of delay. The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the notices and the adjudication order as they were uploaded on the GST portal under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab. They only became aware of the outstanding demand on July 31, 2024, when they received an email from the GST authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal on the ground of delay, considering the petitioner's claim of not being aware of the notices and order due to their upload on the GST portal under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab (Section 107, WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that they remained unaware of all notices and the adjudication order because they were uploaded on the GST portal under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab, and they only became aware of the proceedings upon receiving an email reminder about the outstanding demand. They relied on a Co-ordinate Bench judgment in Sankar Agarwala vs. The Joint Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Appeal) and another in Parakh Consulting LLP vs. The State of West Bengal, where similar circumstances led to the setting aside of orders and an opportunity to respond to show-cause notices. Revenue's arguments: The State supported the GST authorities' action, contending that the petitioner cannot fault the uploading of notices under the "Additional Notices and Orders" tab, as service of notice by portal upload has statutory recognition.