M/S Ram Chand And Sons vs. Additional Commissioner Grade-2 Appeals-1 State Tax And Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73594 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 50 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Ram Chand And Sons Respondent :- Additional Commissioner Grade-2 Appeals-1 State Tax And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Shukla,Kumar Sreshtha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned ACSC for the State - respondents. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeal) - 3, Saharanpur as well as the impugned order dated 16.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Saharanpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a registered partnership firm. He further submits that on 08.01.2013, the sole proprietorship firm converted into a partnership firm through a registered partnership deed. On 18.02.2021, a notice under section 61 of the CGST Act was issued to the petitioner intimating the discrepancies in the returns, which was never served upon the petitioner. Thereafter, on 13.10.2022, a show cause notice was issued under section 73(1) of the CGST Act intiamting the discrepancies in return, which was also not served upon the petitioner. He further submits that thereafter, again on 06.12.2022 and 10.05.2023, notices were issued, which were not served on the petitioner. He further submits that pursuant to the notices, on 16.12.2023, the impugned order has been passed for the assessment year 2017-18 imposing liability of Rs. 1,85,43,950.09 on the petitioner. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 18.11.2024 on the ground of delay. He further submits that as the aforesaid order was uploaded under the tab 'Additional Notices & Orders' of the GST portal, instead of 'Notices & Orders' tab, the petitioner was not aware of the order dated 16.12.2023. When the petitioner came to know about the order, the petitioner preferred an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay, but the appellate authority, vide impugned order dated 18.11.2024, rejected the petitioner's appeal on the ground that he had no power to condone the delay under section 107 of the GST Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it cannot be said that the presumption of deemed service of the order dated 16.12.2023 is attracted in the instant case. He further submits that the order dated 16.12.2023 could not be said to have been served on the petitioner upon its uploading on the GST portal and the period of limitation, therefore, will not begin from 16.12.2023 itself or soon thereafter. In support of her submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgements of the Division Bench of this Court in Ola Fleet Technologies Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. & 2 Others [Writ Tax No. 855/2024, decided on 22.07.2024] and Tasneef Ahmad Mirza Vs. Union of India & 4 Others [Writ Tax No. 1781 of 2024, decided on 21.10.2024] and the judgements of this Court in M/s Xestion Advisor Private Limited Vs. Additional Commissioner & Another [Writ Tax No.1462 / 2024, decided on 09.04.2025] as well as Maharishi Solar Technology Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. & 3 Others [Writ Tax No. 1068/2024, decided on 01.04.2025]. Per contra, learned ACSC supports the impugned orders. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. It is not in dispute that the proceedings were initiated and the order dated16.12.2023 was uploaded under the tab 'Additional Notices & Orders' of the GST portal, instead of 'Notices & Orders' tab. The issue in hand is no more res integra and the same has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Ola Fleet Technologies Private Limited (supra) and Tasneef Ahmad Mirza (supra). In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case as well as the law laid down by this Court in the cases cited above, the impugned order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeal) - 3, Saharanpur as well as the impugned order dated 16.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Saharanpur are hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remanded to the authority concerned to adjudicate the matter afresh. The petitioner may treat the impugned order dated 16.12.2023 as the final notice and submit its written reply within a period of two weeks from today. Thereupon, the assessing officer may issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in the manner prescribed with, at least, fifteen days clear notice. The petitioner undertakes to appear on the date fixed. Appropriate reasoned and speaking order may be passed within a further period of one month from the date of service of notice on the petitioner. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Amit Mishra AMIT KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad