M/S Shyam Traders Having At Office vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shyam Traders, filed a writ petition challenging orders dated 13.12.2023 and 15.09.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Bareilly, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, which created a tax demand. The petitioner contended that the notices and orders were uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, not the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, making them unaware of the proceedings and preventing them from responding within the limitation period. The respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh, did not dispute these contentions regarding the upload location and acknowledged that the issue was covered by a previous judgment.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt as the impugned orders were not reflected under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, but rather under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab. This lack of proper communication meant the petitioner was unaware of the proceedings and could not avail appropriate remedies within the limitation period. The Court found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending or relegating the petitioner to statutory remedies, especially since the disputed amount was already deposited. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 13.12.2023 and 15.09.2023 were quashed. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in the prescribed manner with at least fifteen days' clear notice, after which further proceedings could take place. The ratio decidendi is that non-compliance with prescribed communication methods on the GST portal, leading to an assessee's lack of awareness, vitiates the proceedings and warrants relief.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal, instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, constitutes proper communication to the assessee under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, thereby affecting the limitation period for response? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that uploading notices and orders on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, meant they were unaware of the proceedings and could not respond within the prescribed limitation period. They relied on the High Court's decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others and M/s Mohini Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Another. Respondent's Contention: The respondent's counsel, based on instructions, did not dispute the petitioner's contentions regarding the upload location. They acknowledged that the assessing officer has no option to choose the tab for uploading and that any issue with the portal's functionality would need to be addressed by the GST Network.