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

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Irshad Traders, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 17.11.2022 and 01.07.2022 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Kaushambi, Prayagraj, under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which created a demand against them. The petitioner contended that the notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, making them unaware of the proceedings. Consequently, they could not appear before the authority or challenge the orders within the limitation period. The department did not dispute these contentions, acknowledging that the issue was covered by a previous judgment of the High Court in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The Court found that the impugned orders were not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, and there was no material to reject the petitioner's contention that they were unaware of the proceedings due to improper uploading. The Court noted that the entire disputed amount was lying in deposit with the State Government, meaning there was no outstanding demand. Following the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) and M/s Mohini Traders (Supra), the Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice, in accordance with law, and thereafter proceed with the matter. The Court explicitly stated that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of GST notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, constitutes due communication to the assessee, thereby impacting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period, as per Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, which they were unaware of. This lack of proper communication prevented them from appearing before the authority or challenging the impugned orders within the limitation period. They relied on the High Court's decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and M/s Mohini Traders v. State of U.P. Respondent's (State of U.P.) Argument: The learned counsel for the Department did not dispute the contentions regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. They acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). The Department also noted that the assessing officer has no choice in selecting the tab for uploading and that any issue might need to be addressed by the GST Network.