The GST Appeal Limitation Controversy: Section 107, Portal Uploads, and Judicial Precedents

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime in India was envisioned as a technology-driven tax system. The GST Common Portal (GSTN) serves as the backbone for registration, compliance, and litigation. However, this heavy reliance on digital infrastructure has birthed a complex legal controversy: When is a legal order considered “served” on a taxpayer? 

In the pre-GST era (VAT and Service Tax regimes), orders were physically mailed via Registered Post Acknowledgment Due (RPAD). The “date of service” was physically verifiable via the postal acknowledgment card signed by the recipient. Under GST, orders are uploaded digitally to the dashboard.

Also Read-Understanding Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017: A Guide to Fraud Cases

The friction arises when the department uploads an adverse order (e.g., canceling registration or demanding tax) to the portal without sending an accompanying email or SMS alert. If the taxpayer does not log in daily, they may miss the order entirely until the appeal deadline has passed. As of late 2025, this issue has reached a boiling point. Tax authorities frequently dismiss appeals filed after the 3-month window, claiming the “date of upload” started the clock. High Courts across India, however, have begun stepping in to interpret “communication” in a manner that upholds natural justice over rigid technological procedure.

The Legal Framework: Section 107 & 169 of CGST Act.

To understand the controversy, one must first dissect the statutory provisions governing appeals and service of notices.

Section 107: The Limitation Period.

Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 states:

“Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act… may appeal to such Appellate Authority within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to him.”

Key observations:

• The statute uses the word “communicated”, not “passed” or “uploaded.”
• The limitation is 3 months for the taxpayer (and 6 months for the Department under Section 107(2)).
• Section 107(4) grants the Appellate Authority the power to condone a delay of up to one additional month if “sufficient cause” is shown. Beyond this 3+1 month period, the Appellate Authority generally lacks statutory power to admit appeals.

Section 169: Modes of Service.

How does the department “communicate” an order? Section 169(1) lists the valid methods:

1. Giving or tendering it directly to the person/agent.
2. Dispatching by registered post or speed post with acknowledgment due.
3. Sending it to the email address provided at the time of registration.
4. Making it available on the common portal (GSTN).
5. Publication in a newspaper (last resort).
6. Affixing it at the place of business (last resort).

The Conflict: While Clause (d) of Section 169 allows “making it available on the common portal” as a valid mode of service, the courts are now examining whether this mode stands alone or requires an accompanying intimation (Clause c – Email) to fulfill the doctrine of “Effective Communication.”

The Core Dispute: “Uploaded” vs. “Communicated”.

The central question facing the judiciary is: Can the Department secretly upload an order to the portal and claim the limitation clock has started, even if the taxpayer had no knowledge of it?

The Department’s stance is usually rigid: “The law allows service via portal. You are a registered person; you are expected to check the portal daily.”

The Taxpayer’s defense relies on the Doctrine of Reasonable Knowledge. In a digital age where inboxes are flooded, expecting a business owner to check a government portal dashboard daily for a potential order—without an email alert—is arguably unreasonable and violates the principles of natural justice.

Landmark Judicial Precedents (The Real Case Laws).

Unlike generic summaries, here are the specific, verifiable High Court judgments that govern this field. These are the cases you must cite in your legal drafting.

A. Gujarat High Court: Meril Diagnostics Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2024).

This is perhaps the most significant ruling regarding the definition of “communication.”

• Facts: The GST department passed an order and uploaded it to the portal. No email or hard copy was sent. The taxpayer missed the appeal deadline because they were unaware of the order.
• Argument: The Department argued the appeal was time-barred. The taxpayer argued that “mere uploading” does not equal “communication.”
• Judgment: The Gujarat High Court ruled in favor of the taxpayer. It held that “communication” implies the taxpayer has been made aware of the order. Given the technical complexities of the portal, the Department cannot rely solely on portal uploads without an accompanying email or SMS, especially when the portal itself is prone to glitches. The Court condoned the delay, stating that limitation starts from the date of actual knowledge.

B. Madras High Court: P.K.R. Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (2024).

The Madras High Court echoed the Gujarat HC but focused on Section 169 interpretation.

• Judgment: The Court observed that while Section 169 mentions portal upload as a mode of service, it must be read in conjunction with the intent of the law. The Court set aside the rejection of the appeal, noting that the department failed to prove that the taxpayer had accessed the portal on the date of upload. The limitation period was reset to the date the taxpayer actually downloaded or viewed the order.

C. Madras High Court: Pushpam Reality Case.

In a similar vein, the Madras High Court held that an assessment order uploaded to the portal but not intimated via email cannot be treated as served. The Court stated that the “Common Portal” is a facility, not a trap. Without an alert mechanism, the service is incomplete.

D. Calcutta High Court: S.K. Chakraborty & Sons v. Union of India (2023).

A Cautionary Tale (The Strict View): Not all courts are lenient. In this case, the Calcutta High Court took a strict interpretation of Section 107(4).

• Ruling: The Court held that the Appellate Authority is a creature of the statute and cannot condone a delay beyond the 1 month allowed by law (i.e., 3 months + 1 month). If a taxpayer files an appeal after 4 months, the Appellate Authority has no power to accept it, regardless of the reason (even medical emergencies).
• Remedy: In such cases, the only option is to file a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court, as the High Court has inherent powers to condone delays that statutory authorities do not.

Condonation of Delay: Does Section 5 of Limitation Act Apply?

This is a highly technical but crucial area of law. Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 allows courts to extend the period of limitation for any appeal/application if “sufficient cause” is shown.

The Problem: The CGST Act is a “special statute.” Under legal interpretation (specifically the Supreme Court ruling in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU v. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Ltd), if a special statute prescribes a specific limitation period (3+1 months), the general provisions of the Limitation Act (Section 5) are explicitly excluded.

The 2025 Reality Check:

• The Appellate Commissioner (First Appeal) CANNOT use Section 5 of the Limitation Act. If you are 1 day late beyond the 4-month mark, they must reject your appeal.
• The High Court (Writ Jurisdiction) CAN exercise its extraordinary powers under Article 226 to condone the delay if it finds that natural justice was violated (e.g., order not communicated properly, as per Meril Diagnostics).

The Pre-Deposit Trap: Cash vs. Credit Ledger.

Filing an appeal is not free. Under Section 107(6), a taxpayer must pay:

1. 100% of the admitted tax, interest, and penalty.
2. 10% of the disputed tax (subject to a cap of Rs. 25 Crore).

The Controversy: Can you use the balance in your Electronic Credit Ledger (Input Tax Credit) to pay this 10% pre-deposit? Or must it be paid in Cash?

The Jyoti Construction Ruling (Orissa High Court).

In Jyoti Construction v. Deputy Commissioner of CT & GST, the Orissa High Court ruled that the pre-deposit must be paid via the Electronic Cash Ledger. The Court reasoned that “Output Tax” can be paid via Credit Ledger, but “Pre-deposit” is not output tax; it is a statutory deposit required for the admissibility of an appeal.

CBIC Circular Clarification (2024).

Following conflicting judgments (including a contrary view by the Bombay HC), the CBIC issued instructions clarifying the mechanism. As of 2025, the portal generally restricts the use of the Credit Ledger for pre-deposit in many states, forcing taxpayers to pay in cash.

Warning: If you file an appeal paying the pre-deposit via Credit Ledger, and the Appellate Authority rejects it as invalid payment, your appeal might be treated as “non-est” (not filed) until the cash payment is made. If this correction happens after the limitation period, your appeal could be time-barred.

Procedural Guide: Filing Appeals in 2025.

If you have received an adverse order (Form GST DRC-07), follow this step-by-step protocol to ensure your appeal is valid:

Step 1: Verify Communication Date.

Check three sources:

• The date on the physical order (if received).
• The email timestamp from [email protected].
• The “Date of Issue” on the GST Portal > Services > User Services > View Additional Notices/Orders.

Calculate your 90-day deadline from the latest of these dates if you plan to contest the communication.

Step 2: Prepare Form GST APL-01.

The appeal is filed online on the GST Portal. You will need:

• Appeal Number: Generated upon hitting “New Appeal”.
• Grounds of Appeal: A detailed PDF attachment explaining why the order is wrong legally and factually.
• Statement of Facts: A chronological timeline of events.
• Certified Copy: You must submit a certified (physical) copy of the order to the Appellate Authority within 7 days of e-filing. (Note: Rule 108(3) was amended to say that if the order was digitally signed, a physical copy is not needed, but many offices still demand it. It is safer to submit it).

Step 3: Payment of Pre-Deposit.

Generate the challan on the portal. Ensure you select “10% of Disputed Tax” correctly. Based on Jyoti Construction, prefer paying via Electronic Cash Ledger to avoid technical rejection.

Step 4: Acknowledgement.

Once filed, you will receive a Provisional Acknowledgement. The Final Acknowledgement (Form GST APL-02) serves as proof that your appeal is admitted. If you don’t receive APL-02, check if the officer has issued a defect memo.

8. Future Outlook: The Role of GSTAT.

For years, India lacked a GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT). This meant that if a taxpayer lost the First Appeal (Commissioner Appeals), they had nowhere to go but the High Court.

With the GSTAT becoming operational in phases (starting late 2024/2025), the limitation landscape shifts again:

• Limitation for Tribunal: You have 3 months from the date of the First Appellate Authority’s order to appeal to GSTAT.
• Pending Cases: For orders passed between 2017 and the formation of GSTAT, the government extended the limitation period. You have 3 months from the date the President of the Tribunal enters office to file those old appeals.
• Pre-Deposit for Tribunal: To appeal to GSTAT, you must pay an additional 20% of the disputed tax (over and above the 10% paid earlier).

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).

Q1: Can I file a manual appeal instead of online?

Ans: Generally, no. Rule 108 mandates online filing. However, if the portal is glitching (e.g., error messages), courts have allowed manual filing. You must take screenshots of the error and submit them along with the manual set.

Q2: I was sick and missed the 4-month deadline (3+1). Can the Commissioner help?

Ans: No. The Commissioner (Appeals) has no statutory power to condone delay beyond 1 month. You must file a Writ Petition in the High Court citing “extraordinary circumstances.”

Q3: Does the limitation period start from the Summary Order (DRC-07) or the Detailed Speaking Order?

Ans: It starts from the Detailed Speaking Order. The DRC-07 is merely a summary of the demand. Courts (e.g., Bombay HC in Dauji Ispat) have held that without the detailed reasons (Speaking Order), the right to appeal cannot be exercised, hence limitation does not begin.

Q4: Is the weekend included in the calculation of 3 months?

Ans: Yes. The Limitation Act counts consecutive days. However, if the last day of the limitation falls on a day when the office is closed (Sunday/Public Holiday), you can file on the next working day.

Conclusion:

The landscape of GST litigation in 2025 is defined by the tug-of-war between automated procedure and natural justice. While the GSTN portal facilitates speed, it cannot replace the fundamental requirement of effective communication.

The judgments in Meril Diagnostics (Gujarat HC) and P.K.R. Technologies (Madras HC) are powerful shields for taxpayers. They establish that the Department cannot simply “upload and forget.” However, taxpayers must not be complacent. “Vigilance is the price of liberty”—and in GST, vigilance involves checking your portal regularly, maintaining valid email IDs, and filing appeals strictly within the 3-month window to avoid the costly and uncertain route of Writ Petitions.

Trusted Authority References

For further verification and detailed study of the legal principles and cases discussed, please refer to the following official and highly reputable sources:

• The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017: The foundational law governing GST in India, providing the statutory basis for appeals (Section 107) and service of notices (Section 169).
  Official CBIC Link to CGST Act
• CBIC Circulars and Instructions: Official clarifications, procedural guidelines, and policy decisions issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) that impact GST compliance and appeal processes.
  • CBIC GST Circulars
  • CBIC GST Instructions
• Indian Kanoon: A comprehensive and free legal database for searching and accessing Indian court judgments. This is an essential resource for verifying the specific High Court rulings cited in this article (e.g., Meril Diagnostics, P.K.R. Technologies, Jyoti Construction).
  Indian Kanoon Legal Database
• GST Common Portal: The official online platform for all GST-related activities, including compliance, taxpayer services, and the upload of official orders.
  Official GST Portal
• TaxGuru: A widely recognized and frequently updated portal offering news, articles, expert analysis, and updates on Indian tax laws, including GST and direct taxes. It serves as a valuable resource for contextual understanding and current developments.
  TaxGuru Portal

Note: When searching for specific court judgments on legal databases like Indian Kanoon, it is highly recommended to use the full party names (e.g., “Meril Diagnostics Union of India GST” or “Jyoti Construction Commissioner CT GST”) for the most accurate and relevant results.

Disclaimer: The content of this article is intended for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and relevance as of November 2025, tax laws and judicial interpretations are subject to change. Taxpayers are strongly advised to consult with a qualified Chartered Accountant, Tax Consultant, or Advocate for specific guidance pertaining to their individual circumstances.

C.K. Gupta

Hello, I am C.K. Gupta owner of Taxgst.in, a seasoned finance professional with a Master of Commerce degree and over 20 years of experience in accounting and finance. My extensive career has been dedicated to mastering the intricacies of financial management, tax consultancy, and strategic planning. Throughout my professional journey, I have honed my skills in financial analysis, tax planning, and compliance, ensuring that all practices adhere to the latest financial regulations. My expertise also extends to auditing, where I focus on maintaining accuracy and integrity in financial reporting. I am passionate about using my knowledge to provide insightful and reliable financial advice, helping businesses optimize their financial strategies and achieve their economic goals. At Taxgst.in, I aim to share valuable insights that assist our readers in navigating the complex world of taxes and finance with ease.