A taxpayer gets a fresh hearing if an order is uploaded to an obscure portal tab.

A taxpayer gets a fresh hearing if an order is uploaded to an obscure portal tab.

Issue

What is the appropriate legal remedy for a taxpayer who misses the statutory deadline to file an appeal because the final adjudication order was uploaded to the “Additional notices and orders” tab on the GST portal instead of the main and more visible “View notices and orders” tab?

Facts

• An assessee filed a writ petition challenging a final order passed under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act.
• The assessee’s primary grievance was that they were unaware that the order had been passed because it was not reflecting under the standard “View notices and orders” tab on the GST portal. Instead, it was placed in the less-obvious “Additional notices and orders” tab.
• This, the assessee argued, caused them to miss the statutory deadline for filing an appeal. There was also a secondary dispute about whether the assessee’s original replies had been properly considered by the officer.

Decision

The High Court ruled in favour of the assessee and, instead of simply allowing a late appeal, remanded the matter for a complete re-adjudication.

• The court gave the benefit of the doubt to the assessee regarding their contention about the portal, as there was no material to disprove their claim.
• To ensure a fair outcome, the court devised a practical solution. It directed the assessee to treat the impugned final order itself as a new show-cause notice and to submit a detailed written reply to it within two weeks.
• Following this, the assessing officer was directed to issue a fresh notice for a personal hearing and then pass a new, properly reasoned, and speaking order.

Key Takeways

1. Portal Usability is a Valid Ground for Grievance: The courts are increasingly recognizing that the design and functionality of the GST portal can create genuine difficulties for taxpayers. Placing important orders in non-standard or obscure locations, thereby causing a taxpayer to miss a deadline, can be a valid reason for judicial intervention.
2. The Benefit of the Doubt: In situations involving technical portal issues, if a taxpayer makes a plausible claim that the tax department cannot definitively disprove, the courts may grant the benefit of the doubt to the taxpayer to ensure justice is served.
3. Judicial Remedies Can Be Creative: Instead of just providing the standard relief of allowing a late appeal, the court here crafted a more comprehensive remedy. By resetting the entire adjudication process, it not only addressed the missed appeal deadline but also the underlying concern that the original hearing may have been flawed.
4. Ensuring a Substantive Hearing: The ultimate goal of the court’s order was to ensure that the assessee received a full and fair opportunity to be heard on the merits of their case, a right they were denied due to the combination of the portal issue and the potential non-consideration of their earlier submissions.