M/S Suraj Tempo Transport Service vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/S Suraj Tempo Transport Service, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated April 23, 2024, passed under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act for the period April 2018 to March 2019. The core of the dispute revolves around the proper communication of this order. The petitioner contended that the order was not uploaded correctly on the GST portal, as it did not appear under the "view notices and orders" tab, but rather under a different tab for "additional notice and orders." This alleged improper communication prevented the petitioner from seeking appropriate remedies within the prescribed limitation period. The State-respondents, through the learned Standing Counsel, argued that the assessing officer has no control over how orders are displayed on the portal and that the GST Network is responsible for the portal's design and functionality.

Held

The Court found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the doubt, as there was no material to refute the petitioner's contention that the impugned order was not reflected under the "view notices and orders" tab. The Court also noted that an existing dispute regarding whether all replies and annexures filed by the assessee were displayed to and considered by the assessing officer. Given these circumstances, the Court determined that keeping the petition pending, calling for a counter-affidavit, or relegating the petitioner to the statutory remedy would serve no useful purpose. The Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction for the assessee to treat the impugned order as a final notice and submit a written reply within two weeks. Subsequently, the assessing officer was directed to issue a fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear notice, and to pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order within one month from the date of service of the notice. The petitioner undertook to appear on the date fixed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated April 23, 2024, passed under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, was duly communicated to the petitioner in accordance with the prescribed procedure, specifically concerning its visibility on the GST portal under the "view notices and orders" tab. Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the order was not properly uploaded as it did not appear under the designated "view notices and orders" tab on the GST portal. This failure in communication prevented them from availing timely remedies, and they relied on the precedent set in M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. Revenue's Contentions: The State-respondents contended that the assessing officer lacks the functionality to choose specific tabs for uploading orders and that the GST Network, a separate entity, is responsible for the portal's design and display. They stated that the assessing officer is not at fault for any perceived error in the display.