The Delhi High Court has quashed the order on the grounds that the GST department sent summons of wrong email address which was not registered with Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN).
The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar has observed that the entire defense of the respondent is based on a tabular statement drawn by the Office of the Commissioner (Appeals) which attempts to capture details of summons sent. What, however, needs to be borne in consideration is a failure on the part of the respondent to either place for our consideration a certificate issued by the Speed-Post authorities or a tracking report which may have indicated service of the summons upon the writ petitioner.
The writ petitioner/assessee has challenged the Order. The principal ground on which the order is assailed is an abject failure on the part of the respondent/appellate authority to comply with the principles of natural justice.
The petitioner submitted that notwithstanding the challenge which stands raised to the review order passed by the Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax, the Appellate Authority has proceeded on the premise that the writ petitioner had been duly placed on notice with respect to the appeal preferred by the respondent.
It has been categorically averred in the writ petition that the petitioner was neither placed on notice by the Appellate Authority nor apprised of the pendency of the appeal. It is in the backdrop that the petitioner questions the recital appearing in the order.
The respondent/department has filed a counter affidavit and on the basis of which it is sought to be contended that the Appellate Authority had, in fact, issued summons to the writ petitioner and despite service thereof, it chose not to appear. They also rely upon an email communication which is stated to have been addressed to “samventures497@gmail.com”.
The appellant contended that the particulars of the assessee as captured and recorded on the Goods and Services Tax Network portal and where its email address has been mentioned as skpllb2@gmail.com.
The court held that the email communication was also not sent to the registered email address of the writ petitioner. Consequently, and on this short ground alone, the order of the Appellate Authority is rendered unsustainable.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S Sam Ventures Versus Assistant Commissioner
Case No.: W.P.(C) 9292/2024 & CM APPL. 38103/2024 (Stay)
Date: 18.02.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Aditya Kumar
Counsel For Respondent: Harpreet Singh
Read More: US Border Agents Seize More Illegal Eggs Than Fentanyl Amid Rising Poultry Smuggling
