Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Mohan Kumar Agarwala, challenged an order dated 19th June, 2025 passed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, dismissing his appeal against an adjudication order dated 22nd April, 2024 passed under Section 73, on the ground of delay. The petitioner explained that he remained unaware of the adjudication proceedings because the relevant notices and orders were uploaded on the GST portal under the 'additional notices and orders' tab, and that he only learned of the proceedings after engaging a new accountant when his previous accountant left. His bank account had also been attached pursuant to the adjudication order after his appeal was initially dismissed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether service of adjudication notices and orders solely under the GST portal's 'additional notices and orders' tab constitutes proper service for computing limitation to appeal.
  2. Whether the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently explained to warrant condonation.
  3. Whether the consequential bank account attachment should be lifted once the appeal is restored.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner had no knowledge of the adjudication proceedings since the notices and orders were served only under the portal's 'additional notices and orders' tab, evidenced by screenshots annexed to the writ petition.
  • Reliance was placed on the Division Bench ruling in M/s Ram Kumar Sinhal v. State of West Bengal, holding that such tab-based uploading cannot be treated as proper service.
  • The adjudication order itself was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and Sections 75(4) and 75(6) of the Act.
  • Since the statutory pre-deposit under Section 107(6) had already been furnished, the bank attachment consequent on the dismissed appeal ought to be lifted once the appeal was restored.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State's counsel contested that the specific ground about portal-tab service had not been raised before the Appellate Authority itself, so its order dismissing on delay could not be faulted on that basis alone.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court accepted that the plea about additional-notices-tab service had not been raised before the Appellate Authority, and to that extent the Appellate Authority's order could not be entirely faulted.
  • However, since the petitioner's screenshots showing tab-based service were undisputed by the respondents, and following the binding ratio in Ram Kumar Sinhal, the Court held that service was not properly effected on the petitioner.
  • The delay in filing the appeal was accordingly condoned as attributable to genuine lack of knowledge rather than negligence, and the impugned appellate order dismissing the appeal on limitation was set aside, restoring the appeal for fresh consideration on merits, including the natural justice challenge to the adjudication order.
  • Since the petitioner's pre-deposit under Section 107(6) was not in dispute, the attachment of his bank account, made on the strength of the now-restored appeal's earlier dismissal, was directed to stand lifted.

Important Clarification

  • Uploading of adjudication notices and orders exclusively under the GST portal's 'additional notices and orders' tab does not amount to proper service, and delay in filing an appeal caused by such improper service is liable to be condoned.
  • Where the statutory pre-deposit for an appeal has already been made, any bank attachment linked to the dismissed appeal must be lifted once the appeal stands restored, since the revenue's interest is already protected by the pre-deposit.
  • Taxpayers should specifically raise portal-service defects before the Appellate Authority itself where possible, though courts will still grant relief where undisputed evidence of such defects is placed before them.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 – governs filing of appeals, limitation, and the mandatory pre-deposit.
  • Section 75(4) and (6), CGST Act, 2017 – requires personal hearing before adjudication and reasoned orders.
  • Section 73, CGST Act, 2017 – determination of tax not paid, under which the original adjudication order was passed.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision favours the assessee. Delay in filing the appeal was condoned, the appellate order dismissing it was set aside, the appeal restored for hearing on merits, and the bank attachment lifted.

Case Details

High Court at Calcutta; W.P.A. 17939 of 2025; Mohan Kumar Agarwala vs The Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Raiganj Charge and Others; Coram: Justice Om Narayan Rai; Order dated 23.12.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.