In an unusual turn, the Rajasthan High Court has come to the rescue of a small-town businesswoman who found herself locked out of her own GST portal due to a dispute with her tax consultant.
The bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Sangeeta Sharma at the Jodhpur seat held that the delay in filing her appeal could not be counted from the date the order was uploaded online, as she had no access to it until her login credentials were updated.
Background
The case arose from M/s Sahil Steels, a proprietorship firm in Churu run by Smt. Rubina. She had engaged a local tax consultant to register her firm under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. Trouble started when the consultant allegedly stopped filing her GST returns and refused to share the login ID and password.
Rubina claimed that despite repeated requests, the consultant did not cooperate. Left helpless, she approached the Commercial Taxes Officer on 5 February 2024, asking to change the email and mobile number linked to her GST account. However, the request was only approved more than a year later, on 17 March 2025.
In the meantime, the department had passed an assessment order on 25 July 2024 and uploaded it on the GST common portal. She never saw it because she couldn't log in. Matters came to a head when her bank account was suddenly attached on 5 March 2025, prompting her to find out about the assessment order and file an appeal on 25 March 2025.
Court's Observations
The Appellate Authority had earlier dismissed her appeal as time-barred, saying the 90-day limitation began from 25 July 2024 the date the order was uploaded online.
But the High Court disagreed.
"The expression 'communication to such person' under section 107(1) has its own significance," the bench observed, stressing that simply uploading an order does not amount to communication if the person has no access to it.
The Judges noted that Rubina had no way to know about the order before her login details were changed on 17 March 2025. They said,
"Until the petitioner’s mobile number and e-mail ID were changed, she could not have had access to the common portal… she cannot be accused of the delay."
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Rejects Plea Against Municipal Action, Stresses Citizens Cannot Evade Public Obligations
They also made an interesting remark on departmental practice:
"If the respondent-department can send attachment orders through e-mail, why should it not send the assessment orders through e-mail so as to ward off any sort of communication gap or confusion about the date of communication?"
Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the court quashed the Appellate Authority's order dated 22 April 2025 and restored her appeal. It directed the authority to give her a hearing and decide the matter on merits, provided she complies with the pre-deposit requirements under Section 107(6) of the GST Act.
With that, the bench gave a quiet but firm message that technicalities should not override fairness, especially when a taxpayer is kept in the dark through no fault of her own.
Case Title: M/s Sahil Steels v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case Number: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11326/2025
