M/S Kallu Traders Thru. Proprietor Dinanath vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. And 2 Others

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.09.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ayodhya. The Court found that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, which held that uploading notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant the petitioner was not properly communicated with and was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The Court directed the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days clear notice, in accordance with law, and to proceed further based on that notice. The ratio decidendi is that non-compliance with the prescribed method of uploading notices and orders on the GST portal, leading to a lack of awareness for the assessee, vitiates the proceedings.

Facts

The petitioner, M/S Kallu Traders, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 04.09.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. This order created a demand against the petitioner for the financial year April 2019-March 2020. The petitioner contended that the notice and order were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, making them unaware of the proceedings and unable to respond within the limitation period. The Department did not dispute these contentions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of the notice and order on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, constitutes proper communication to the petitioner, thereby affecting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that due to the notices and order being uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, they were unaware of the proceedings and thus could not appear before the authority or challenge the order within the limitation period. They relied on the High Court's decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others. Revenue's Argument: The learned counsel for the Department did not dispute the petitioner's contentions regarding the tab where the notices and orders were uploaded and conceded that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd.