M/S Zeeshan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Zeeshan Traders, had its GST registration cancelled on March 31, 2021. The revenue has not contended that this registration was ever revived or that the petitioner sought its revival. Consequently, the petitioner argues it was not obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued for the period April 2020 to March 2021, which preceded an adjudication order dated February 17, 2025. The revenue has also not claimed to have issued any physical or offline notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. The High Court noted that the essential requirement of natural justice had not been fulfilled.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices for the period April 2020 to March 2021, as their GST registration had been cancelled on March 31, 2021, and had not been revived. The Court found that the revenue had not established that any physical or offline notice was issued or served on the petitioner prior to the adjudication order dated February 17, 2025. Consequently, the Court concluded that the essential requirement of the rules of natural justice had not been fulfilled. The adjudication order dated February 17, 2025, was set aside. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit its reply to the show cause notice within four weeks, and upon compliance, a fresh order was to be passed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, expeditiously, preferably within three months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices for the period April 2020 to March 2021, given that its GST registration was cancelled on March 31, 2021, and was not revived, thereby raising a question of procedural fairness and compliance with principles of natural justice under the UPGST Act, 2017. Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that since their registration was cancelled and not revived, they were not obligated to check the GST portal for notices. They contended that the adjudication order dated February 17, 2025, was passed without fulfilling the requirements of natural justice, as no physical or offline notice was served. Respondent (State of U.P. and Another): Did not dispute that the registration was cancelled and not revived. Did not claim to have issued any physical/offline notice. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue regarding the petitioner's obligation to check the portal.