M/S Balwan Singh Yadav vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Balwan Singh Yadav, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 17, 2021, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-4, Jhansi, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The demand was created for the financial year 2017-2018. The petitioner contended that notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab. Consequently, the petitioner was unaware of the proceedings and could not appear before the authority or challenge the orders within the limitation period. The department 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 17, 2021, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-4, Jhansi. The Court followed the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, which held that if notices and orders are uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt. The reasoning was that such uploading does not constitute proper communication, preventing the assessee from availing their remedies within the limitation period. The ratio decidendi is that proper and effective communication of notices and orders is essential for the validity of proceedings under the GST Act, and failure to do so, particularly concerning the visibility on the GST portal, warrants relief. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with law, and thereafter, further proceedings were to 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 petitioner, thereby affecting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab rendered them unaware of the proceedings, preventing them from appearing before the authority or questioning the validity of the 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 and M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. Respondent's Argument: The Department, based on the material on record, did not dispute the petitioner's 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).