M/S V.R. Distributers vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s V.R. Distributors, is challenging an order dated 20.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Prayagraj, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that the notices and the impugned order were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab. Consequently, the petitioner claims to have been unaware of the proceedings and unable to appear before the authority or challenge the order within the limitation period. The Department, through its counsel, did not dispute these contentions regarding the portal upload and acknowledged that the issue is covered by a previous judgment of this Court.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding the proper communication of the notices and the impugned order. Following the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), the Court found that the uploading of the order on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, meant that the petitioner could not be deemed to have received proper notice. The Court noted that no material existed to reject the petitioner's contention. Consequently, the impugned order dated 20.04.2024 was quashed and set aside. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least fifteen clear days' notice, in the manner prescribed by law, and thereafter proceed with the matter. The Court observed that the entire disputed amount was lying in deposit with the State Government, thus there was no outstanding demand.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, constitutes proper communication to the assessee, thereby enabling them to respond within the prescribed limitation period? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the upload on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab did not constitute proper communication, leading to their unawareness of the proceedings and inability to file a timely response or challenge the impugned order. They relied on the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others and M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. Respondent's Argument: The respondent (State) did not dispute the factual contention regarding the tab on which the notices and orders were uploaded. They acknowledged that the issue was covered by the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra).