M/S Shyam Auto Motors vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shyam Auto Motors, is challenging an order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Azamgarh, under Section 74 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contends that the notices issued under Section 74 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 notices and the subsequent order, preventing them from appearing before the authority or challenging the order within the limitation period. The revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not dispute the factual contention regarding the tab where notices were uploaded.

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. This lack of proper communication prevented the petitioner from seeking appropriate remedies within the limitation period. The Court found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the disputed amount was already deposited. Citing the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Mohini Traders, the Court quashed the impugned order dated 10.02.2023. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with law, and thereafter proceed with the matter. The ratio decidendi is that non-compliance with prescribed communication methods on the GST portal, leading to an assessee's lack of awareness and inability to avail remedies, warrants setting aside the order and remanding the matter for fresh proceedings.

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 under Section 74 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, thereby entitling the petitioner to a remedy within the period of limitation? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that uploading notices on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant they were unaware of the proceedings. 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, where similar issues led to a remand. Revenue's Argument: The Standing Counsel for the Department did not dispute the factual contention regarding the tab where notices and orders were uploaded. They also acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The Department's counsel, based on instructions, indicated that the GST Network, a separate entity, would be responsible for addressing issues related to the web portal's functionality.