M/S Vijay Sharma Contractor vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vijay Sharma Contractor, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 20.04.2024 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, State Tax, Sector-2, Hasanpur, Moradabad, under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled on 14.10.2019, after which no business was conducted. A show cause notice was allegedly uploaded on the GST portal, leading to the impugned order. The petitioner contended that after registration cancellation, they were not obligated to check the GST portal, and any notice should have been served through alternative means.

Held

The Court held that there was a violation of the principle of natural justice. The Court agreed with the principle laid down by a coordinate Bench in M/s Katyal Industries v. State of U.P. and others. The reasoning was that once a petitioner's registration is cancelled, they are not obligated to check the GST portal. Therefore, the mode of service of any show cause notice must be through alternative means to the petitioner. The impugned order dated 20.04.2024, passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, was quashed and set aside. The Court directed the department to issue a proper notice to the petitioner and proceed in accordance with the law. No other issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the service of a show cause notice uploaded on the GST portal is sufficient when the petitioner's GST registration has been cancelled and no business is being carried out, thereby violating the principles of natural justice, under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that once their GST registration was cancelled, they were not obligated to monitor the GST portal. They contended that the mode of service for any show cause notice should have been through alternative means, and the portal upload was insufficient, leading to a violation of natural justice. They relied on the principle enunciated in M/s Katyal Industries v. State of U.P. and others. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent State.