M/S Vmak Research And Services Private Limited vs. State Of Up And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vmak Research And Services Private Limited, is challenging an order dated December 30, 2023, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-9, Gautam Budh Nagar, under Section 74 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that notices issued under Section 73 of the Act 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 notices and the subsequent order, preventing them from appearing before the authority or challenging the order within the limitation period. The revenue, represented by the State, did not dispute these contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders.

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated December 30, 2023. The Court found that the issue raised by the petitioner, concerning the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, was covered by the previous judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). In that case, the Court had granted the benefit of doubt to the petitioner when notices were not uploaded in the manner required, leading to a lack of due communication and an inability to seek appropriate remedy within the limitation period. The Court reasoned that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially when the disputed amount was already deposited. Therefore, the Court directed the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with law, and to proceed further based on that 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 due communication to the petitioner, thereby impacting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period, as contemplated under Section 73 and Section 74 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the notices and orders were not properly communicated as they were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, which they were unaware of. This prevented them from appearing before the authority or challenging the impugned order within the limitation period. 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). Revenue's Argument: The counsel for the Department did not dispute the petitioner's contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab and acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra).