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

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Zeeshan Traders, had its GST registration cancelled effective October 31, 2020, under the UPGST Act, 2017. The revenue has not contended that this registration was ever revived or that the petitioner sought revival. Consequently, the petitioner argues it was not obligated to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued via e-mode for the period 2019-20, preceding an adjudication order dated May 17, 2024. 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 these peculiar facts, deeming it unnecessary to keep the petition pending or relegate the petitioner to an alternative remedy.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices issued via e-mode for the period 2019-20, as its GST registration had been cancelled effective October 31, 2020, and there was no dispute about this cancellation or any attempt by the petitioner to revive it. Furthermore, the Court found that the adjudication order dated May 17, 2024, passed without any physical or offline notice being served on the petitioner, violated the essential requirement of the rules of natural justice. The Court reasoned that since the petitioner's registration was cancelled, relying solely on e-mode notices without ensuring actual service or attempting offline communication was unjust. The ratio decidendi is that a taxpayer whose registration is cancelled cannot be expected to regularly check the GST portal for notices, and any adjudication order passed without affording an opportunity of hearing through proper notice, especially when registration is cancelled, is unsustainable. The Court set aside the order dated May 17, 2024, and directed the petitioner to submit its reply to the show cause notice within four weeks, after which a fresh order is to be passed after affording a personal hearing, expeditiously and preferably within three months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices issued through e-mode for the period 2019-20, given that its GST registration was cancelled effective October 31, 2020? (Question of law) 2. Whether the adjudication order dated May 17, 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 Contention: The petitioner argued that since its GST registration was cancelled, it was not required to monitor the GST portal for e-mode notices. They also contended that the adjudication order was passed in violation of natural justice as no physical notice was served. The petitioner relied on the fact that the revenue did not dispute the cancellation of registration or the lack of physical notice. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not dispute the cancellation of the petitioner's registration. They also did not claim to have issued any physical/offline notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. The judgment does not record any specific argument from the revenue regarding the petitioner's obligation to check the portal.