M/S Ashirbad Batries vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ashirbad Batries, is challenging a show cause notice dated December 20, 2023, and a demand order dated April 19, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Gorakhpur, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The demand pertains to the Financial Year 2018-19. The petitioner contends that the notices and order were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, making them unaware of the proceedings and unable to respond within the limitation period. The respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh, did not dispute these contentions.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt as the impugned order was not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, but rather under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. The Court found no material to reject the petitioner's contention that the order was not properly communicated. Citing the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, the Court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to relief. The Court quashed and set aside the show cause notice and the demand order. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner, providing at least 15 days' clear notice, in the manner prescribed by law, and thereafter, pass appropriate reasoned and speaking orders. The Court noted that the entire disputed amount was lying in deposit, meaning there was no outstanding demand.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of the show cause notice and demand order on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, constitutes due communication to the petitioner under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that due to the notices and order being uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, they were unaware of the proceedings and could not appear before the authority or challenge 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 and M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. Respondent's Argument: The respondent's counsel, based on available material, did not dispute the contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. The respondent also acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The respondent indicated that the GST Network, a separate entity, might be responsible for the portal's functionality.