M/S Raja Drugs Agencies vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Raja Drugs Agencies, is challenging an order dated January 11, 2023, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Moradabad, under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. This order created a demand against the petitioner for the financial year 2017-18. The petitioner contends that the notice issued under Section 73 was 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 notice and the order, preventing them from appearing before the authority or challenging the order within the limitation period. The respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh, did not dispute these contentions.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding the proper communication of the notice and order. Following the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, the Court found that the uploading of the impugned order on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant that the petitioner could not be deemed to have received proper notice. The Court reasoned that this failure in communication prevented the petitioner from availing their statutory remedies within the prescribed limitation period. The Court quashed the impugned order dated January 11, 2023, and directed the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with the law. The Court explicitly stated that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the disputed amount was stated to be lying in deposit.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of a notice and order 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 impacting the limitation period for challenging the order, under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that uploading the notice and order on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant they were unaware of the proceedings. This prevented them from filing a timely response or appeal, and they relied on the High Court's decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others. Respondent's Argument: The respondent, represented by the learned Standing Counsel, did not dispute the petitioner's contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. They also conceded that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd.