GST Notices and Orders must be Signed Digitally or Physically: Jharkhand Imposes Rs. 10k cost on Dept [Read Order]

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that notices and orders issued under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act must bear either a physical or digital signature, as mandated by Rule 26(3) of the SGST Rules, 2017.

A writ petition was filed by Rajendra Modi, director of M/s Rajendra Modi Construction & Developers Pvt. Ltd., challenging the validity of certain GST notices and orders issued by the Dhanbad Circle SGST authorities.

The petitioner argued that the Show Cause Notice (Form GST DRC-01) and the Summary of Order (Form GST DRC-07), both dated May and August 2024 respectively, were issued without any digital or manual signature from the concerned State Tax Officer.

Law Simplified with Tables, Charts & Illustrations – Easy to Understand - Click here

Despite the respondent department's claim that the documents were digitally signed, no such copies were presented before the Court. The documents on record, produced by the petitioner, visibly lacked any form of signature or seal, casting serious doubts on their authenticity and validity.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M. S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan condemned the practice of issuing unsigned or digitally unauthenticated GST communications. The Court highlighted that such actions are in clear violation of Rule 26(3) of the Jharkhand GST Rules, which require that all notices, orders, or certificates be issued only through a Digital Signature Certificate (DSC).

The court stated that “We deprecate this practice on the part of the respondents in issuing show cause notices and passing orders without putting a digital signature or a physical signature thereon particularly when Rule 26(3) of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax (SGST) Rules, 2017 mandates issuance of notices, certificates or orders only through a digital signature certificate.”

Accordingly, the Court set aside the unsigned documents and imposed a cost of ₹10,000 on the respondent department, payable to the petitioner. However, the Court granted liberty to the authorities to initiate fresh proceedings, in compliance with legal procedures and digital authentication norms.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates