M/S Vishal Ent Udhyog vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Vishal Ent Udhyog, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated December 19, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Azamgarh, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the notices issued under Section 73 were uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab. Consequently, the petitioner claimed to be 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 did not dispute these contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders.

Held

The Court held that the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant that the petitioner was not properly communicated with. This lack of proper communication meant the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt. 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. Therefore, the impugned order dated December 19, 2023, was quashed and set aside. 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 proper and clear communication of notices and orders to the assessee through the designated portal tab is essential for the validity of proceedings and for the assessee to avail their remedies within the prescribed time.

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 the limitation period for response and challenge? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that uploading notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab did not amount to proper communication, as they were unaware of these uploads. This lack of awareness prevented them from responding or challenging the impugned order within the prescribed time. 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 respondent, State of U.P., did not dispute the factual contention regarding the tab on which notices and orders were uploaded. The counsel for the department acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra).