Section 62 of the CGST Act —Service of Assessment Orders – The Petitioner challenged the assessment orders and submitted that the assessments pertaining to the months April and May 2019 were completed under Section 62 on best judgment basis. Further, these orders were not served on him and within 30 days after the date of receipt of the orders, he filed the returns as permitted under Section 62, therefore, the assessment orders have to be treated as withdrawn by virtue of the provisions of Section 62 of the Act. The respondent submitted that the assessment order in ASMT-13 dated 20.8.2019 has been issued by utilizing the option available with the common Portal and copy of same was emailed to the registered email id. But the petitioner filed the returns on 30.10.2019 ie., with a delay of 71 days. Since the filing is not within 30 days, ASMT-13 cannot be withdrawn and the petitioner is liable to pay the amount as per ASMT-13. The Court observed that the assessment orders dated 20.8.2019 were served on the petitioner through publication on the web portal and an email was also sent at his registered email id. The service of an order through the web portal is one of the methods of service statutorily prescribed under Section 161(1)(c) and (d). The returns filed by the petitioner was only on 30.10.2019,ie., 71 days after the date of service of the order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court held the assessment orders as valid and the remedy of the petitioner against the said assessment order can only be through an appeal before the appellate authority under the Act. The Court directed that the recovery steps for recovery of amounts confirmed in assessment orders and demand notices shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month so as to enable the petitioner to move the appellate authority.—Pee Bee Enterprises Vs. Assistant Commissioner O/O The Assistant Commissioner-2 Special Circle 2, The Commissioner, State Goods And Service Tax Department  27 TAXLOK.COM 029 (Kerala)