Interstellar Residency Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner Varanasi Sector - 10 And Another

Facts

The petitioner, Interstellar Residency Private Limited, had its GST registration cancelled effective October 31, 2019. 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 2018-19, which preceded an adjudication order dated April 26, 2024. The revenue has also not claimed that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. The High Court noted these peculiar facts, deeming it unnecessary to keep the petition pending or relegate the petitioner to an alternative remedy.

Held

The Court held that given the undisputed fact that the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled effective October 31, 2019, and had not been revived, the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices issued for the period 2018-19. The Court found that the revenue had not claimed that any physical or offline notice was issued or served on the petitioner before the adjudication order dated April 26, 2024, was passed. Therefore, the essential requirement of the rules of natural justice had not been fulfilled. The Court set aside the order dated April 26, 2024, directing that the petitioner could treat the said order as a notice and submit its final reply within four weeks. Subsequently, a fresh order was to be passed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months. The ratio decidendi is that an adjudication order passed without fulfilling the principles of natural justice, particularly when the assessee's registration is cancelled and no physical notice is served, is unsustainable.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued for the period 2018-19, given that its GST registration was cancelled effective October 31, 2019? (Question of law) 2. Whether the adjudication order dated April 26, 2024, passed without issuing any physical/offline notice to the petitioner, violates the principles of natural justice? (Question of mixed law and fact) Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that since its GST registration was cancelled, it was not required to monitor the GST portal for notices. It further contended that the adjudication order was passed in violation of natural justice as no physical or offline notice was served. The petitioner relied on the principle that a party whose registration is cancelled should not be expected to check an online portal for notices related to periods prior to cancellation. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue did not dispute that the petitioner's registration was cancelled and had not been revived. It also did not claim that any physical/offline notice was served on the petitioner prior to the impugned order. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue regarding the petitioner's obligation to check the portal or the validity of the order in light of the lack of physical notice.