Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, LAPITA BANERJI, JJ.
Optum Global Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 26273 of 2023
Decided On : 22-11-2023
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral)
Challenge in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 01.03.2023 (Annexuxre P-1) whereby the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals)-cum-Appellate Authority), Faridabad has rejected the appeal being not maintainable on account of the fact that it had been presented in a manner by filing it offline (manual) on 31.08.2020 against the order dated 04.06.2020. The said appeal was filed against the rejection of the refund for Rs. 32,69,309/- for the period from April, 2018 to June, 2018. Reliance has been placed upon Rule 108 of the Haryana Goods & Service Tax Rules, 2017 (in short 'the Rules') which provide that the appeal can be filed either electronically or otherwise, as may be notified by the Commissioner.
2. It has been brought to our notice that the said Rule was amended on 04.08.2023 and the appeals have been filed earlier. It has also been further brought to our notice that a co-ordinate Bench in CWP-9051-2023, Go Daddy India Domains and Hosting Services Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana, decided on 29.04.2023 (Annexure P-11) came to the conclusion that it is a highly technical ground for dismissing the appeal and set aside the said order and issued directions to hear the appeal on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 3308 of 2021, Ali Cotton Mill v. Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), 2022 (56) G.S.T.L., 270 (A.P.) (Annexure P-12).
3. A perusal of the said judgment would also go on to show that the wording of the Rule had been taken into consideration since it is provided "electronically or otherwise" and, therefore, the manual filing as such has also been accepted.
4. Notice of motion.
5. Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
6. Keeping in view the above, we see no tangible reason to pass a different order. Accordingly, the order dated 01.03.2023 (Annexure P-1) is quashed. The appeal is restored on the Board of the Appellate Authority, which shall proceed to decide the appeal on merits.
7. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
The court ruled that manual filing of appeals is permissible under the amended Haryana GST Rules, emphasizing the need to address appeals on merits rather than dismissing them on technical grounds.
The court established that the requirement for a certified copy of an order is not applicable when the order is available on the common portal, reflecting a shift towards practical accessibility in l....
The main legal point established is that the Circular does not bar manual filing of refund applications, and rejection based solely on non-electronic filing is contrary to the relevant rules.
The State cannot deny rightful refund claims based on the pending intention to appeal when substantial time has elapsed without action.
The main legal point established is that the provisos to Rule 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 do not apply when the appeal is electronically filed and uploaded on the common por....
The rejection of refund claims without providing an opportunity of being heard was a violation of the proviso to sub-rule (3) of rule 92 of the CGST Rules and the principles of natural justice, rende....
The court ruled that electronic filing of appeals must be recognized within the limitation period, emphasizing that procedural rules should serve justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
