M/S Akshita Kuteer Udyog vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Akshita Kuteer Udyog, had its GST registration under the UPGST Act, 2017 cancelled effective March 6, 2023. 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 2017-18 via e-mode, preceding the adjudication order dated December 30, 2023. The revenue has also not claimed that any physical or offline notice was issued or served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. The Court found that the essential requirements of natural justice were not fulfilled.

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 2017-18, as its GST registration had been cancelled effective March 6, 2023, and there was no contention from the revenue that the registration was revived or that the petitioner sought revival. The Court further held that the adjudication order dated December 30, 2023, passed without issuing any physical/offline notice to the petitioner, violated the essential requirements of natural justice. The Court reasoned that since the petitioner's registration was cancelled, relying on e-mode notices without physical service was improper. The ratio decidendi is that principles of natural justice, including adequate notice, must be adhered to even when registration is cancelled, and electronic notices are insufficient if physical notice is not provided or if the registration is inactive. The Court set aside the order dated December 30, 2023, and directed the petitioner to treat the order itself as a notice and submit a reply within four weeks. A fresh order is to be passed after affording a personal hearing, preferably within three months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices issued via e-mode for the period 2017-18, given the cancellation of its GST registration prior to the adjudication order? 2. Whether the adjudication order dated December 30, 2023, passed without issuing any physical/offline notice to the petitioner, violates the principles of natural justice? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that with its GST registration cancelled effective March 6, 2023, it was not required to monitor the GST portal for electronic notices concerning the tax period 2017-18, especially when no revival of registration was sought or granted. They further argued that the adjudication order was passed without proper notice, violating natural justice principles. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue did not dispute the cancellation of the petitioner's registration. They also did not claim that any physical/offline notice was served on the petitioner before the adjudication order was passed. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue regarding the petitioner's obligation to check the portal or the validity of the notice procedure.