Notice under GST Rule 68 to be issued electronically or through post?-TAXGURU

Clipped from: https://taxguru.in/goods-and-service-tax/notice-gst-rule-68-issued-electronically-post.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

Jabir Hasan Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax GST (Uttarakhand High Court)

It is not disputed that Rule 68 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 provides for notice to the non filers of returns – a notice in form GSTR – 3A shall be issued electronically to a registered person who fails to furnish return under Section 39 or Section 44 or Section 45 or Section 52.

It is admitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the State that in fact, no notice, as envisaged in Rule 68 of the Rules, was issued, rather a postal notice (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition) was sent.

It is a settled principle of law that if enactment or legislation prescribes a particular procedure to conduct business affairs, then it has to be followed. In this case, impugned order has been passed without issuing electronic notice to the petitioner but by issuing registered postal notice.

In that view of the matter, writ petition is allowed.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

Shri Shakti Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction for setting aside the order dated 26.06.2021 passed by respondent no. 2 and order dated 28.09.2019 passed by respondent no. 1.

Petitioner is a GST registration holder. He defaulted in filing of returns. For that reason a show cause notice was issued to him. After hearing the petitioner, the Authority has passed the impugned order. It was assailed in an appeal and the appeal was also dismissed.

It is not disputed that Rule 68 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 provides for notice to the non filers of returns – a notice in form GSTR – 3A shall be issued electronically to a registered person who fails to furnish return under Section 39 or Section 44 or Section 45 or Section 52.

It is admitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the State that in fact, no notice, as envisaged in Rule 68 of the Rules, was issued, rather a postal notice (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition) was sent.

It is a settled principle of law that if enactment or legislation prescribes a particular procedure to conduct business affairs, then it has to be followed. In this case, impugned order has been passed without issuing electronic notice to the petitioner but by issuing registered postal notice.

In that view of the matter, writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders 26.06.2021 and 28.09.2019 passed by respondent no. 2 and 1 respectively are hereby quashed. The Authority concerned is directed to comply with Rule 68 of the aforesaid Rules and reconsider the matter of the petitioner, in accordance with law.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s