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 disputed that the registration was not revived, nor that the petitioner sought its revival. The petitioner was consequently not obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued for the period April 2019 to March 2020, which preceded the adjudication order dated July 23, 2024. The revenue also did not contend that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. The High Court noted these peculiar facts and found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to an alternative remedy.

Held

The Court held that the adjudication order dated July 23, 2024, was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court reasoned that since the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled on March 31, 2021, and had not been revived, the petitioner was not obliged to check the GST portal for any e-mode notices issued for the period April 2019 to March 2020. Furthermore, the revenue did not contend that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. Consequently, the essential requirement of natural justice was not fulfilled. The Court set aside the adjudication order and directed the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice within four weeks. Upon compliance, a fresh order is to be passed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, expeditiously and preferably within three months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order dated July 23, 2024, passed by the respondent authority, is vitiated due to non-compliance with the principles of natural justice, specifically regarding the issuance and service of show cause notices, under the provisions of the UP GST Act, 2017 and relevant rules? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that since their GST registration was cancelled on March 31, 2021, and was not revived, they were not required to monitor the GST portal for any notices. They further contended that no physical or offline notice was served upon them prior to the impugned adjudication order, thus violating the principles of natural justice. Respondent's Contention: The revenue did not dispute the cancellation of registration or the lack of revival. They also did not claim to have issued any physical/offline notice to the petitioner before passing the adjudication order.