M/S Royal Trading Company vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Royal Trading Company, is challenging orders dated 05.07.2022 and 24.05.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-9, Bareilly, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, which created a demand against them. The petitioner contends 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 claims to have been unaware of the proceedings and unable to appear before the authority or challenge the order within the limitation period. The respondent-State, through the learned counsel for the Department, did not dispute these contentions.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt. The Court found that the impugned orders were not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, which prevented the petitioner from seeking an appropriate remedy within the limitation period. The Court noted that the issue of proper communication of the order was central to the dispute. Citing the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) and M/s Mohini Traders (Supra), the Court concluded that the petitioner's contention regarding the improper uploading of notices and orders was valid. 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. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed and set aside. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in the prescribed manner, providing at least 15 days' clear notice, and thereafter, appropriate proceedings could 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 right to seek a remedy within the limitation period, 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 impugned order within the prescribed limitation. 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 learned counsel for the Department, based on available material, 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).