A GST Ruling on procedure from the Andhra Pradesh High Court

What Was the Problem?

Harsha Trading Private Limited, a GST-registered business dealing in commercial vehicles and parts, received a tax assessment order for the year 2018–2019. The department raised certain tax demands.

The company wanted to challenge that order. But on no order uploaded on GST portal, the appeal was filed manually after pre- deposit (as required under GST law).

So what did they do?

• Paid the mandatory pre-deposit,

• Filed an appeal,

• Submitted documents,

• Attended hearings,

• Argued the case on merits.

Sounds normal, right?

Here’s the twist.

The appeal was filed manually (physically) instead of electronically on the GST portal in absence of order online.

What Did the appellate authority Do?

This is where things get interesting.

The appellate authority:

• Accepted the appeal.

• Issued hearing notices.

• Conducted a personal hearing.

• Allowed additional submissions.

• Kept the case pending for more than a year.

Then suddenly — after all this — it rejected the appeal.

Why?

Not because the company was wrong on tax.
Not because the claim lacked merit.

But because the appeal was filed manually instead of electronically, as required under Rule 108 of the GST Rules.

“Rule 108. Appeal to the Appellate Authority –

(1) An appeal to the Appellate Authority under sub-section (1) of section 107 shall be filed in FORM GST APL-01, along with the relevant documents, either electronically or otherwise as may be notified by the Commissioner, and a provisional acknowledgement shall be issued to the appellant immediately.

(2) The grounds of appeal and the form of verification as contained in FORM GST APL- 01shall be signed in the manner specified in rule 26.

(3) A certified copy of the decision or order appealed against shall be submitted within seven days of filing the appeal under sub-rule (1) and a final acknowledgement, indicating appeal number shall be issued thereafter in FORM GST APL-02 by the Appellate Authority or an officer authorised by him in this behalf:

Provided that where the certified copy of the decision or order is submitted within seven days from the date of filing the FORM GST APL-01, the date of filing of the appeal shall be the date of the issue of the provisional acknowledgement and where the said copy is submitted after seven days, the date of filing of the appeal shall be the date of the submission of such copy.

Explanation – For the provisions of this rule, the appeal shall be treated as filed only when the final acknowledgement, indicating the appeal number, is issued.”

In Simple meaning of Rule 108 as follows:

1) An appeal to the Appellate Authority under sub-section (1) of section 107 shall be filed in FORM GST APL-01, along with the relevant documents, either electronically or otherwise as may be notified by the Commissioner. A provisional acknowledgement shall be issued immediately.

2) The grounds of appeal and the form of verification as contained in FORM GST APL-01 shall be signed in the manner specified in Rule 26.

3) Where the decision or order appealed against is uploaded on the common portal, a final acknowledgement indicating the appeal number shall be issued in FORM GST APL-02.

If the decision or order is not uploaded on the common portal, the appellant shall submit a self-certified copy of the decision or order within seven days from the date of filing the appeal.

In such cases:

The date of filing of the appeal shall be:

The date of issue of the provisional acknowledgement, if the copy is submitted within seven days.

The date of submission of the copy, if submitted after seven days.

Questioning the said order, writ petition filed

To issue writ, order or direction on order that order of appellate authority:

· Arbitrary (unreasonable), illegal and unsustainable in law,

· Without jurisdiction,

· Without authority of law,

· Violation of constitution of India

o Article 14 (equality before law),

o Article 19(1)(g) (right to carry on business),

o Article 265 (no tax without authority of law).

Article 14 say: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”

How it applies in present case

The company argue that appellant authority acted arbitrary as

· The authority did not object at the beginning.

· It treated the appeal differently after accepting it.

· It used a technicality after fully hearing the matter.

Article 19(1)(g) say: “The right of every citizen to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business.”

How it applies in present case

The company argue that rejecting appeal on technicality ground

· Affected its business operations.

· Created financial burden.

· Imposed tax liability without proper hearing on merits.

Article 265 say: “No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.”

How it applies in present case

The company argue that enforcing a tax demand without deciding the case on merits. But invoke on rejection of right to appeal unreasonably.

The Big Question before High Court

Can a government authority:

1. Accept an appeal,

2. Hear it fully on merits,

3. Keep it pending for over a year,

4. And then dismiss it purely on a technical filing issue?

The High Court’s answer was clear: No.

What the Court Said

The Court essentially said:

If you had a problem with manual filing, you should have said so at the beginning.

You cannot:

• Sit on the case for over a year,

• Hear detailed arguments,

• And then reject it on a technicality.

That’s not fairness.
That’s not justice.

The Court set aside the rejection order and sent the case back, directing the authority to decide it on merits.

Why This Judgment Matters

This case is bigger than just one company’s appeal.

It highlights three important principles:

· Procedure Should Serve Justice, Not Block It

Rules are important. Electronic filing is important. Compliance is important.

But when procedure becomes a weapon to deny substantive rights, courts step in.

Law is meant to ensure justice — not create traps.

· Authorities Must Act Fairly

If the department truly believed electronic filing was mandatory, it should have rejected the appeal immediately.

Accepting the appeal, conducting hearings, and then dismissing it later looks arbitrary.

Government power must be exercised responsibly.

· Substantive Rights Cannot Be Defeated by Hyper-Technicality

The right to appeal is a statutory right.

If:

· Pre-deposit is paid,

· Appeal is filed within time,

· The matter is heard,

Then rejecting it only because it wasn’t uploaded online is excessive formalism.

Courts increasingly discourage this approach.

The Broader GST Context

GST is a technology-driven system. Most filings are electronic.

But we all know:

• Portals have glitches.

• Orders are sometimes not uploaded.

• Technical issues happen.

In such situations, insisting on rigid compliance without considering circumstances can lead to injustice.

This judgment sends a message:
Digital compliance is important — but fairness is more important.

A Real-World Example

Imagine you submit a scholarship application in person instead of online.

The authority:

• Accepts it,

• Interviews you,

• Reviews your documents,

• Waits for a year,

• And then says: “Rejected because it wasn’t submitted online.”

Would that feel fair?

That’s exactly what the Court corrected here.

What Businesses / Professional Should Learn

• Always try to comply with electronic filing requirements.

• Document any portal issues.

• Ensure pre-deposit is paid on time.

• If your appeal is rejected purely on technical grounds after being heard, judicial review is possible.

This ruling strengthens taxpayer protection against procedural overreach.

Final Thought

The essence of this judgment is simple:

The High Court reminded tax authorities that procedure is a tool — not a trap.

In a system increasingly driven by digital compliance, this human-centered approach is both timely and necessary.

We provide consultation to resolve your queries in the Area of International Tax, Indian Income Tax, Goods and Service Tax Act, though call with our Tax Expert CA Shilpa Arora.