Fair Deal Cars Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner, Sector-1, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others

Facts

The petitioner, Fair Deal Cars Private Limited, had its GST registration cancelled effective October 11, 2023. The revenue did not dispute 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 2018-19 via e-mode, which preceded an adjudication order dated April 23, 2024. The revenue also did not claim 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 adjudication order dated April 23, 2024, was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The reasoning was based on the undisputed fact that the petitioner's GST registration was cancelled effective October 11, 2023, and had not been revived. Consequently, the petitioner was not obligated to check the GST portal for e-mode show cause notices issued for the period 2018-19. The revenue also did not provide any evidence of issuing physical or offline notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. Therefore, the essential requirement of natural justice, namely, the right to be heard after proper notice, remained unfulfilled. The Court set aside the order dated April 23, 2024, and directed that the petitioner could treat the said order itself 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, expeditiously, preferably within three months.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order dated April 23, 2024, passed against the petitioner for the period 2018-19, is vitiated due to non-compliance with the principles of natural justice, specifically the requirement of issuing proper notice, in light of the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that since its GST registration was cancelled effective October 11, 2023, it was not obligated to check the GST portal for any e-mode show cause notices issued for the period 2018-19. Furthermore, no physical or offline notice was served before the adjudication order was passed, thus violating the principles of natural justice. Respondent's contention: The revenue did not dispute the cancellation of registration or the absence of physical notice. Their argument, implied by the court's observation, would likely be that notices were issued electronically as per procedure, but this was countered by the petitioner's registration status.