The Alld Whole Sale Central Coop Store Limited vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, The Alld Wholesale Central Coop Store Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 27.03.2023 passed under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and an order dated 02.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Act. The petitioner contended that the notices and orders were uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, rendering them unaware of the proceedings and unable to appear or challenge the order within the limitation period. The respondent, State of U.P. and two others, did not dispute these contentions. The proceedings under Section 73 were dropped during the pendency of the writ petition, rendering that part of the challenge infructuous.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt due to the notices and orders being uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab. This manner of uploading prevented the petitioner from being aware of the proceedings and the impugned order, thus hindering their ability to appear before the authority and challenge the order within the prescribed limitation period. The Court found that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially as the disputed amount was already deposited. Therefore, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 27.03.2023 and 02.12.2023. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice in the prescribed manner, after which further proceedings would take place. The ratio decidendi is that improper uploading of statutory notices on a government portal, which leads to the assessee's lack of awareness and inability to participate in proceedings, warrants a fresh opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
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 entitling the assessee to a benefit of doubt and a fresh opportunity to respond? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the GST Act). Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that due to the incorrect uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, they were unaware of the proceedings and the impugned order, preventing them from appearing before the authority or challenging the order 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, which granted relief in a similar situation. Respondent's Argument: The respondent, through learned Standing Counsel, did not dispute the factual contention 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).
Sections Cited
Section 74, Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90448-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2550 of 2025 Petitioner :- The Alld Whole Sale Central Coop Store Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and 2 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Divya Prakash Tripathi, Ravi Pratap Singh, Tanmay Sadh Counsel for Respondent :- Nimai Dass (A.C.S.C.), Ankur Agarwal (S.C.) Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved of the order dated 27.03.2023, passed under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('the Act'), Annexure No. 1 and order dated 02.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Act (Annexure No. 2).
Submissions have been made that during the pendency of the present proceedings, the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act have been dropped. In consequence, the challenge laid to the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act has rendered infructuous.
Qua the proceedings under Section 74 of the Act, submissions have been made that notices issued under Section 74 of the Act, were uploaded on 'Additional Notices and Orders' Tab of the G.S.T. Portal, which is evident from Annexure-7 and consequently, the petitioner being unaware of issuance of the notices as well as passing of the order, could neither appear before the authority nor question the validity of the impugned order within the period of limitation.
Submission has been made that this Court in Ola Fleet
Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024 decided on 22.7.2024 taking note of the said aspect of the matter wherein notices have not been uploaded on the 'Due Notices and Orders' and instead uploaded on 'Additional Notices and Orders', came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt and consequently, the matter has been remanded back to the authority.
Learned counsel appearing for the Department based on the material available on record does not dispute the contentions raised pertaining to uploading of the notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' Tab instead of 'Due Notices and Orders' Tab and the fact that the issue as raised is covered by judgement in the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd (Supra).
In the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd (Supra) a co- oridiante Bench of this Court inter alia observed and came to the following conclusion:- “4. Ultimately, vide last order dated 05.04.2024 the dispute between the parties boiled down to the issue due communication of the impugned order dated 12.07.2023. The petitioner claims that the same was not uploaded in the manner required inasmuch as the impugned order does not show up on the asseseess portal under the tab "view notices and orders". Rather, it reflects under the other tab for "additional notice and orders".
Thus, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner could not seek appropriate remedy against that order, within limitation. Reliance is placed on an earlier order of the Court in Writ Tax No.551 of 2023 (M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another)
decided
on 03.05.2023
[Neutral
Citation No.2023:AHC:115008-DB].
On the other hand upon written instructions received learned Standing Counsel would contend that the assessing officer is not to blame for any error being cited by the assessee. Referring to the web portal available to the assessing officer, it had been indicated that there is no option/ choice available to the assessing officer to upload the order in the manner that it may reflect under any one of the particular tabs visible to the assessee. On query made, Shri Ankur Agarwal fairly states that if it all issue may have to be addressed by the GST Network a separate entity constituted to design maintain and run the web portal.
At present, it does appear that the petitioner is entitled to a benefit of doubt. No material exist to reject the contention being advanced that the impugned order was not reflecting under the tab "view notices and orders". On merits, as noted in the earlier orders an other dispute exists whether all replies and annexures to the replies as filed by the assessee were displayed to the assessing officer and whether those have been considered. We find, no useful purpose may be served for keeping this petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit or even relegating the petitioner to the available statutory remedy. The entire disputed amount is lying in deposit with the State Government. Therefore, there is no outstanding demand. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with a direction, the assessee may treat the impugned order as the final notice and submit his written reply within a period of two weeks. 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.”
In view of the submissions made and the judgement in the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd (Supra) the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The orders impugned dated 27.03.2023 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Prayagraj Sector – 2, Prayagraj (A) (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) and 02.12.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Prayagraj Sector – 2, Prayagraj (A) (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition) are quashed and set aside.
The Assessing Officer may issue a fresh at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioner in the manner prescribed in accordance with law and based on the said notice, further proceedings may take place. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Mukesh Pal/Pkb (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.