M/S Ram Gopal Ram Milan vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ram Gopal Ram Milan, is challenging an order dated November 30, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-2, Karvi, Chitrakoot, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that the notices and orders related to the demand 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 revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not dispute the factual contention regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab.

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated November 30, 2023. The Court's decision was primarily based on the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, where a similar issue of notices and orders being uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab was considered. The Court found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt as the impugned order was not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, thereby hindering their ability to seek appropriate remedies within the limitation period. The reasoning was that the lack of proper communication through the designated tab prejudiced the petitioner. The Court did not find it useful to keep the petition pending or relegate the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the disputed amount was already deposited. The operative direction was for the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with law, for further proceedings.

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 petitioner, thereby making the impugned order dated November 30, 2023, valid and binding, particularly in light of Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab did not amount to due communication, preventing them from responding or seeking remedies within the prescribed time. They relied on the High Court's decision 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. Revenue's contention: The Standing Counsel for the Department, based on instructions, did not dispute the petitioner's contention regarding the tab where notices and orders were uploaded. The judgment notes that the assessing officer has no choice regarding which tab the order reflects on, suggesting the issue might lie with the GST Network.