M/S Khandewal Infotech vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Khandewal Infotech, is challenging two orders dated 25.09.2023 and 13.12.2023 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, State Tax Jurisdiction, Bareilly, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. These orders created a demand against the petitioner for the Financial Year 2017-18. The petitioner's contention is 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 claims to have been unaware of the proceedings and unable to appear before the authority or challenge the orders within the limitation period.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt. The reasoning was based on the fact that the notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, which led to the petitioner's unawareness of the proceedings. The Court found no material to reject the petitioner's contention that the impugned order was not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab. The Court referred to its previous decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, which dealt with a similar issue of improper uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 25.09.2023 and 13.12.2023. The operative direction was for the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice in the prescribed manner, allowing further proceedings to take place based on this fresh notice.

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 orders valid and binding? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the GST Act). Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that due to the notices and orders being uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, they were unaware of the proceedings and thus could not respond or challenge the orders 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 (Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024) and M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another (Writ Tax No.551 of 2023). Respondent's Argument: The learned counsel for the Department, based on the available record, did not dispute the contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. They acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra).