M/S Ritesh Communication vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ritesh Communication, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 15/12/2023 passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 73(9) of the GST Act. The core of the dispute revolved around the communication of a prior order dated 12.07.2023. The petitioner contended that this order was not uploaded correctly on the GST portal, failing to appear under the 'view notices and orders' tab, and instead showing under a different tab for 'additional notice and orders'. This alleged improper uploading prevented the petitioner from filing an appropriate remedy within the prescribed limitation period. The petitioner relied on a previous High Court order in a similar case. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, argued that the assessing officer had no control over how orders appeared on the portal, suggesting the issue lay with the GST Network.

Held

The Court found merit in the petitioner's contention regarding the improper communication of the impugned order. It was noted that there was no material to reject the petitioner's claim that the order was not reflected under the 'view notices and orders' tab. The Court also acknowledged that a separate dispute existed regarding whether all replies and annexures filed by the assessee were displayed to and considered by the assessing officer. Given these circumstances, the Court deemed it unproductive to keep the petition pending or to relegate the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the entire disputed amount was already deposited. Consequently, the Court directed that the petitioner treat the impugned order as a final notice and submit a written reply within two weeks. The assessing officer was then instructed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least fifteen days' clear notice, and to pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order within one month of the service of this fresh notice. The Court did not explicitly leave any issue undecided, but the direction for a fresh notice and order implies a re-adjudication.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 12.07.2023 was communicated to the petitioner in accordance with the prescribed procedure under the GST Act, specifically concerning its visibility on the GST portal under the 'view notices and orders' tab? 2. Whether the petitioner was prevented from availing appropriate statutory remedies due to the alleged improper uploading of the order, thereby entitling them to relief? The petitioner argued that the order was not uploaded in the manner required, as it did not appear under the 'view notices and orders' tab on the assessee's portal, thus hindering their ability to seek a remedy within the limitation period. They relied on the precedent set in M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. The revenue contended that the assessing officer lacked the functionality to control the specific tab under which an order appears and that any issue with the web portal's design would lie with the GST Network.