Bhupendra Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Vikas Gupta vs. Deputy Commissioner State Tax, Sector - 11 Prayagraj Uttar Pradesh

Facts

The petitioner, Bhupendra Enterprises, challenged an order dated 25.01.2024 and DRC-07 dated 26.04.2024, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Prayagraj, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, creating a demand against them. 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. Consequently, the petitioner claimed to be unaware of the notices and orders, preventing them from appearing before the authority or challenging the impugned order within the limitation period. The Department did not dispute these contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt. It was found that the impugned order was not reflecting under the 'view notices and orders' tab, which is crucial for proper communication to the assessee. The Court noted that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The Court found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the disputed amount was lying in deposit. Therefore, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 25.01.2024 and DRC-07 dated 26.04.2024. The ratio decidendi is that non-compliance with the prescribed procedure for uploading notices and orders on the GST portal, leading to an assessee's lack of awareness and inability to respond within the limitation period, warrants relief. The Court directed the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice of at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioner in the manner prescribed in accordance with law, and thereafter, further proceedings may 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 affecting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the notices and orders were not uploaded in the manner required, as they did not appear under the 'view notices and orders' tab but rather under 'additional notice and orders'. This lack of proper communication prevented them from seeking appropriate remedies within the limitation period. They relied on the judgment 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 material on record, did not dispute the contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. The Standing Counsel indicated that the assessing officer has no choice to upload orders in a specific tab visible to the assessee, suggesting the issue might need to be addressed by the GST Network.