M/S Kohinoor Enterprises vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kohinoor Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging orders dated December 28, 2023, and September 30, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax Jurisdiction, NOIDA. These orders created a demand against the petitioner for the financial year 2017-2018 under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended 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, making them unaware of the proceedings and unable to respond within the limitation period. The respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh, did not dispute these contentions.

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the orders dated December 28, 2023, and September 30, 2023. The Court found that the petitioner's contention regarding the improper uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal was not disputed by the respondent. This issue was squarely covered by the previous judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), where a similar situation led to a remand. The Court reasoned that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt as the impugned order was not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, preventing them from seeking appropriate remedies within the limitation period. The Court noted that the entire disputed amount was already in deposit, and no outstanding demand existed. The operative direction was for the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice of at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioner in the prescribed manner, after which further proceedings would take place.

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 assessee, thereby impacting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period, as contemplated under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? 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 appear before the authority or challenge the validity of the impugned orders 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. Respondent's Argument: The respondent, through the Standing Counsel, 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).