Sanjay Gupta, Proprietor Of M/S. Jsr Gems And Jewellery vs. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/Avato, Ward 45, Zone 3, Delhi & Anr.

Facts

The petitioner, Sanjay Gupta, proprietor of M/s. JSR Gems and Jewellery, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 15.04.2024 passed under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This order was pursuant to a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 08.12.2023. The petitioner contended that the SCN was uploaded on the GST portal under the category ‘View Additional Notices & Orders’, which was not easily accessible, and argued that it should have been placed under the category ‘View Notices & Orders’. The petitioner claimed this placement hindered their ability to access the notice. The impugned SCN was issued before the GST portal was redesigned to address such accessibility issues.

Held

The Court held that uploading a notice under the heading ‘Additional Notices’ does not constitute sufficient service in terms of Section 169 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court referred to its earlier decision in M/s ACE Cardiopathy Solutions Private Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. and a Madras High Court judgment in M/s East Coast Constructions and Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST). The reasoning was that communications placed under ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ were not as readily accessible as those under ‘View Notices and Orders’. Although the GST Authorities subsequently redesigned the portal to place these tabs adjacent to each other under one heading, the impugned SCN was issued before this redesign. Consequently, the Court found the service to be deficient. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for fresh adjudication. The petitioner was granted two weeks to file a response to the SCN, and the authority was directed to provide an opportunity for a hearing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of a Show Cause Notice (SCN) under the category ‘View Additional Notices & Orders’ on the GST portal constitutes sufficient service in terms of Section 169 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, when the petitioner claims it was not easily accessible. The petitioner argued that the placement of the SCN under ‘View Additional Notices & Orders’ was improper and made it difficult to access, thus not constituting proper service. They relied on the principle that notices should be placed in a readily accessible location. The respondents, represented by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 45, Zone 3, Delhi, contended that uploading the notice on the portal was sufficient compliance with Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. They did not present specific arguments regarding the accessibility issue beyond the general contention of portal upload being sufficient.