Shyam Babu Singh vs. The Commissioner, West Bengal Goods And Services Tax And Ors.

Held

The Court held that while the petitioner's claim of not locating the show cause notice due to its upload under "view additional notices" does not invalidate the adjudication order itself, it may have hindered his ability to locate it. The Court noted that the petitioner was denied the opportunity to challenge the subsequent order passed by the appellate authority on July 29, 2024, before the appellate tribunal due to the tribunal's non-constitution. Considering these peculiar facts and to allow the petitioner an opportunity to test the order passed by the proper officer on merit, the Court deemed it prudent to remand the matter back to the appellate authority. This was conditioned upon the petitioner depositing an additional 10% of the remaining disputed tax amount, paying costs of Rs. 12,500/- to the respondents, and a further Rs. 12,500/- to the Calcutta High Court State Legal Services Committee within three weeks. The appellate authority was directed to hear and dispose of the appeal on merit upon compliance with these directions, treating the additional deposit as pre-deposit.

Facts

The petitioner, Shyam Babu Singh, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated July 29, 2024, passed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. This order rejected his belated appeal against an adjudication order dated September 4, 2023. The adjudication order was passed ex parte because the petitioner claimed he could not locate the preceding show cause notice, which was uploaded under the "view additional notices" section of the portal instead of the usual "view notices and orders" section. The petitioner argued that this prevented him from responding and being represented, and that the rejection of his appeal on grounds of delay, coupled with the non-constitution of the appellate tribunal, denied him an opportunity to contest the adjudication order on merit. The State contended that the petitioner had multiple opportunities to respond to the show cause notice and failed to file a timely appeal with sufficient explanation for the delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was prevented from challenging the adjudication order dated September 4, 2023, on merit due to the manner in which the show cause notice was uploaded on the GST portal, thereby constituting a sufficient ground for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation of portal functionalities and due process). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was uploaded under "view additional notices," making it difficult to locate, leading to his non-representation and an ex parte adjudication order. He further argued that the rejection of his appeal solely on grounds of delay, especially with the appellate tribunal yet to be constituted, denied him a chance to argue the merits of the case. He sought either a hearing on merit by the High Court or a remand to the appellate authority. Revenue's arguments: The State argued that the petitioner was given repeated opportunities to respond to the show cause notice, failed to file the appeal within the prescribed time, and did not provide a sufficient explanation for the delay in his belated appeal, which was consequently rejected. Therefore, no interference by the High Court was warranted.