Order Date – 18 November 2023

Parties: Piku Saha Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Facts –

• The Petitioner, Piku Saha, was served with an intimation of tax ascertained as being payable u/s 74(5) in Form GST-DRC-01A upon the petitioner for the period 2021-2022 through email and uploaded the same in the category of “Additional Notice and Orders” in the GST portal.
• Thereafter an unsigned show cause notice was issued on 1 September, 2022 and a summary Show Cause Notice in FORM GST DRC-01 with annexures for the period 2021-22 on the ground that there was a mismatch between GSTR7 and GSTR 3B filed by the petitioner and the same was also intimated through e-mail.

Issue –

• Whether the unsigned notice issued without verification of returns are in violation of Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules or not?

Order –

• The Single Bench of hon’ble High Court observed that on a reading of section 74, it is ex facie evident that verification under section 61 of the Act is neither a pre-condition nor a sine qua non for initiation of proceedings under section 74 of the Act. In this case, from the records itself it appears that there is an apparent mismatch between FORM GSTR-7 and FORM GSTR-3B filed by the petitioner. The plea of the notices not being uploaded in the correct portal is also without basis.
• The online portal is accessible or deemed to be accessible to every assessee and their authorised representative. Moreover, contemporaneous knowledge of such notices or intimation of tax had also been forwarded to the petitioner by e-mail. Thus, the petitioner was duly intimated in multiple modes. In such circumstances, the plea of non-receipt of notice to the petitioner is untenable.
• There is also no merit in the contention that the notices issued to the petitioner were neither signed nor authenticated. Any notice issued and uploaded in the GST Portal is automatically authenticated by way of digital signatures.
• In this case, the petitioner despite having received notice as regards the intimation of tax gst DRC-01A and the subsequent show cause notice failed to respond to the same. An assessee cannot choose to ignore all notices and steps taken by the respondent authorities who are now bound to act in a time bound manner under the Act and thereafter take the plea of natural justice.
• Thus  there is no illegality nor perversity nor infraction of law nor procedural impropriety which warrants any interference with any of the impugned orders and steps taken pursuant thereto. The writ petition dismissed.