Demand – Limitation for issuance of orders – Order ‘issued’ within limitation period but ‘served’ thereafter is legitimate

The Calcutta High Court has held that an assessee cannot be permitted to impeach the order on the grounds that though the order was ‘issued’ within the period of limitation, it was ‘served’ after the statutory period for making the orders. The order under Section 73 of the CGST Act, though digitally signed on 30 April 2024, was uploaded on the portal on 1 May 2024, which was outside the limitation provided under Section 73(9).

The High Court in M. M. Motors v. Senior Joint Commissioner observed the following:

• Statutory scheme under CGST Act distinguishes between the act of issuing the orders under Section 73(9) and the act of serving the order provided in Section 169.

• Statute does not mandate the service of an order within the period of limitation.

• Legislature, while repealing the previous legacy laws, has chosen to make a distinction between the words ‘issue’ and ‘service’.

• Since for the purpose of appeal, the date of service of order is treated to be the effective date, the same does not alter the date of making (issuance) of the order.