M/S- Rajendra Kumar Neeraj Kumar And Sons vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/S- Rajendra Kumar Neeraj Kumar And Sons, had its GST registration under the UPGST Act, 2017 cancelled on January 2, 2021, effective from October 22, 2020. The revenue did not dispute that the registration was never revived or that the petitioner did not seek revival. Consequently, the petitioner argued it was not obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued for July 2017 - March 2018, which preceded an adjudication order dated February 3, 2025. The revenue also did not claim that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. The High Court considered these facts to be peculiar and sufficient to decide the petition without requiring a counter-affidavit or relegating the petitioner to an alternative remedy.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices issued for the period July 2017 - March 2018, especially since its GST registration was cancelled effective October 22, 2020, and was not revived. The revenue did not dispute these facts, nor did it claim that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the adjudication order dated February 3, 2025, was passed. The Court found that the essential requirement of the rules of natural justice had not been fulfilled. Therefore, the adjudication order dated February 3, 2025, was set aside. The petitioner was granted four weeks to submit its reply to the show cause notice. Following this, a fresh order was to be passed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. The ratio decidendi is that a taxpayer whose registration is cancelled and not revived, and who has not been served with physical notice, cannot be expected to monitor the GST portal for notices preceding an adjudication order, as this would violate natural justice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices for the period July 2017 - March 2018, given that its GST registration was cancelled effective October 22, 2020, and was not revived, and no physical notice was served prior to the adjudication order dated February 3, 2025? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural requirements under the UPGST Act, 2017). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that since its GST registration was cancelled and not revived, and no physical notice was served, it was not obliged to check the GST portal for notices preceding the adjudication order. The issuance of notices through e-mode to a cancelled registration, without physical service, violates the principles of natural justice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not contend that the petitioner was obligated to check the portal or that any physical notice was served. Their silence on these points implies an acceptance of the petitioner's factual assertions regarding the cancellation of registration and lack of physical notice.