M/S Sri Krishna Saree Center vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Sri Krishna Saree Center, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 30.12.2023 and 12.08.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Prayagraj. These orders created a GST demand against the petitioner for the financial year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that the notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab. Consequently, the petitioner claimed to be unaware of the proceedings and unable to respond or challenge the orders within the limitation period. The respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh, did not dispute these contentions.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding the proper communication of the notices and orders. The reasoning was based on the undisputed fact that the impugned orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, which prevented the petitioner from having due notice and an opportunity to respond within the prescribed period. This aligns with the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). The Court found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially as the disputed amount was stated to be lying in deposit. The ratio decidendi is that non-compliance with prescribed procedures for uploading statutory notices on the GST portal, leading to a lack of awareness for the assessee, warrants relief. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 30.12.2023 and 12.08.2022. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice of at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioner in accordance with law, and further proceedings were to take place based on this fresh notice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was duly communicated the notices and orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Prayagraj, as per the prescribed procedure under the GST Act and Rules, considering they were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that uploading notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the designated 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, amounts to a lack of proper communication. This prevented them from being aware of the proceedings and filing a timely response or appeal, thereby violating principles of natural justice. They relied on the High Court's decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others. Respondent's arguments: The respondent, through learned Standing Counsel, did not dispute the factual contention regarding the tab on which notices and orders were uploaded. They also conceded that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra).