M/S Ups Scs (INDIA) Private Limited vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that uploading an order under the "additional notices and orders" tab on the GST Portal does not constitute sufficient service. This finding is based on the reasoning adopted by the Delhi High Court in M/s Umang Realtech Pvt. Ltd. (supra), which in turn referred to a judgment of the Madras High Court. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to entertain the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 30.05.2023 on merits, and not to reject it on the ground of limitation. The Appellate Authority was instructed to permit the petitioner to file the appeal within two weeks, and upon filing, it would be considered on its merits. The Court clarified that it had not considered or commented on the merits of the contentions of either party, and all rights and contentions were reserved.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s UPS SCS (India) Private Limited, is challenging an order dated 30.05.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner attempted to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority but it was rejected as belated. The petitioner claims they were unaware of the impugned order as it was uploaded on the GST Portal under the "additional notices and orders" tab, not the primary "notices and orders" tab. The State contended that uploading on the portal constitutes deemed awareness. The petitioner relied on a Delhi High Court judgment in a similar case.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading an order under the "additional notices and orders" tab on the GST Portal constitutes sufficient service of the order to the assessee, thereby making an appeal filed subsequently belated? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that uploading the order under the "additional notices and orders" tab does not amount to sufficient service. They relied on the judgment in M/s Umang Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court), which held that such uploads do not constitute proper service. Revenue's arguments: The respondent/State contended that the petitioner was deemed to be aware of the order as it was uploaded on the GST Portal. However, the respondent conceded that the order was uploaded under the "additional notices and orders" tab.