Certified Copy Not Necessary To File GST Appeal, Order Downloaded From Site Enough: Gujarat High Court

Quashing an order of the tax authority which rejected a GST Appeal due to non-submission of a certified copy, the Gujarat High Court said that when an appealed order is available on a common portal and can be directly accessed by the Appellate Authority, there should be no need to submit a “certified copy” to confirm its authenticity.

The court further underscored that in today's age insistence on certified copy of orders which can be obtained directly from the website of judicial and quasi-judicial bodies is "regressive in nature and puts a premium on needless archaism".

The petitioner had filed an appeal challenging the order of Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Rajkot. Due to the petitioner's failure to submit a certified copy of the order in question, the appeal was dismissed in accordance with Rule 108(3) of the GGST Rules, 2017.

At the time of the filing as per Rule 108(3) of GST Rules 2017, the submission of a certified copy of the order or decision appealed against within seven days of filing the appeal is required. If the certified copy was not submitted within this period, the date of filing the appeal would be treated as the date of submission of the certified copy.

The petitioner contended that the relevant rules had been amended on December 26, 2022, allowing for the submission of self-certified copies in cases where the decision or order appealed against was not uploaded on the common portal. In the present case, however, the order had indeed been uploaded on the portal, and therefore, according to the amended rule, a self-certified copy was sufficient.

A Division Bench of Justice Bhargav Karia and Justice D.N. Ray in its October 30 order observed that the amendment to Rule 108(3) with effect from December 26, 2022 altered the requirements for submitting certified copies. The amended rule no longer required a certified copy where the order was available on the common portal. The Court noted that this amendment was clarificatory in nature and therefore applied retrospectively.

It then said, "It may also be noted that when the order which is appealed against is issued or uploaded on the common portal and the same can be viewed by the Appellate Authority, there could be no requirement whatsoever of submitting a certified copy of such uploaded order to test its authenticity. In today's day and age, insistence on “certified copy” of orders which can be obtained directly from the website of judicial and quasi judicial bodies is regressive in nature and puts a premium on needless archaism. For these reasons, the instant petition deserves to be allowed". 

The Court referred to the case of Otsuka Pharmaceutical India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India and other (2024), of the high court which said that the amendment effective from December 26, 2022, is "clarificatory in nature, it would be applicable retrospectively and the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority rejecting the appeal would not survive, in any case". 

The amendment states, "Where the decision or order appealed against is uploaded on the common portal, a final acknowledgement, indicating appeal number shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02 by the Appellate Authority or an officer authorised by him in this behalf and the date of issue of the provisional acknowledgement shall be considered as the date of filing of appeal...Provided that where the decision or order appealed against is not uploaded on the common portal, the appellant shall submit a self-certified copy of the said decision or order within a period of seven days from the date of filing of FORM GST APL01 and a final acknowledgement, indicating appeal number, shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02 by the Appellate Authority..."

The Court thereafter quashed and set aside the order of the Appellate Authority and the matter was remanded back to the appellant authority to pass a fresh de novo order on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

The Court said that it has not gone into the merits of the case, which will be decided by the Appellate Authority according to law. Disposing of the plea the Court then directed that the authority must decide and complete the exercise within 12 weeks of receiving a copy of the high court order. 

Case Title: Venus Macro Prints Pvt. Ltd. v/s State of Gujarat

LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 174

Click Here To Read/Download Order