M/S Katyal Industries vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Katyal Industries, had its GST registration cancelled on May 21, 2019. The revenue has not disputed that this registration was never revived, nor did the petitioner seek its revival. Consequently, the petitioner argued that it was not obliged to check the GST portal for show cause notices issued for the period of July 2017 to March 2018, which preceded an adjudication order dated December 11, 2023. The revenue did not contend that any physical or offline notice was served on the petitioner before the impugned order was passed. The Court noted that the essential requirement of natural justice had not been fulfilled.
Held
The Court held that given the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration on May 21, 2019, and the absence of any contention from the revenue that the registration was revived or that physical/offline notices were issued, the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal for notices pertaining to the period of July 2017 to March 2018. The Court found that the essential requirement of natural justice, specifically the right to be heard, had not been fulfilled. Therefore, the adjudication order dated December 11, 2023, was set aside. The petitioner was directed to treat the said order as a notice and submit its 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.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner was obligated to visit the GST portal to receive show cause notices for the period of July 2017 to March 2018, given that its GST registration was cancelled on May 21, 2019, and not revived. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that since its registration was cancelled and not revived, it was not obligated to check the GST portal for notices. The revenue did not issue any physical or offline notice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding the petitioner's obligation to check the portal or the issuance of notices.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33719-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 609 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Katyal Industries Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Praveen Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Ankur Agarwal, S.C. Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ankur Agarwal learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, it remains undisputed that the petitioner's registration under the UPGST Act, 2017 was cancelled on 21.5.2019. It is not the case of the revenue that the said registration has ever been revived or that the petitioner ever sought revival of that registration.
In view of the above, it does merit acceptance that the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive the show cause notices that may have been issued to the petitioner for the period of July, 2017 to March, 2018 through e-mode, preceding the adjudication order dated 11.12.2023 passed in pursuance thereto.
It is also not the case of the revenue that any physical/offline notice was issued to or served on the petitioner before the impugned order came to be passed. 4
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.