M/S Sarvajanik Shikshonnayan Sansthan Thru. Founder Susheel Chandra Trivedi vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State Tax U.P. Lko. And 3 Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Sarvajanik Shikshonnayan Sansthan, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 20.08.2024 passed under Section 73 of the Act, and a subsequent order dated 28.06.2025 that dismissed their appeal as time-barred. The petitioner argued that they could not access the GST portal to respond to proceedings due to the absence of a User ID and Password. They had applied for re-issuance of these credentials on 12.06.2025. Consequently, an ex-parte order under Section 73 was passed against them. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment by a Division Bench of the same High Court in a similar matter.

Held

The Court held that the order passed under Section 73 of the Act was unsustainable because it was an ex-parte order passed without giving the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing. The Court adopted the reasoning from the Division Bench judgment in M/s Shiv Shakti Enterprises, which dealt with a similar situation. The inability of the petitioner to access the GST portal, despite their efforts to obtain the necessary credentials, was a crucial factor. Consequently, the impugned order under Section 73 and the subsequent appellate order dismissing the appeal as time-barred were quashed. The matter was remanded to the assessing authority for passing a fresh order in accordance with the law, ensuring the petitioner is given a proper opportunity to be heard.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order passed under Section 73 of the Act is sustainable when it was passed ex-parte without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, particularly when the petitioner was unable to access the GST portal due to non-receipt of User ID and Password? (Question of law) Contentions: Petitioner: The ex-parte order under Section 73 is bad in law as it was passed without providing a proper opportunity of hearing. The inability to access the GST portal, despite applying for re-issuance of credentials, prevented them from participating in the proceedings. Reliance was placed on the judgment in M/s Shiv Shakti Enterprises vs. State of U.P. and others. Revenue/State: No arguments were recorded for the respondent State or other opposite parties.