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

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Nawab Traders, filed a writ petition challenging orders dated February 10, 2021, and December 31, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-4, Saharanpur, under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 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. Consequently, the petitioner claimed to be unaware of the proceedings and unable to appear or challenge the orders within the limitation period. The revenue did not dispute these contentions regarding the upload location of the notices and orders.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the doubt regarding the communication of notices and orders. The Court found that the impugned orders were not reflecting under the 'View Notices and Orders' tab, as claimed by the petitioner. Relying on the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and M/s Mohini Traders (supra), the Court concluded that the petitioner could not effectively seek a remedy within the limitation period due to the manner of upload. The Court noted that the entire disputed amount was already lying in deposit, thus there was no outstanding demand. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated February 10, 2021, and December 31, 2020. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner with at least 15 days' clear notice in the prescribed manner, and further proceedings would take place based on this fresh notice.

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 due communication to the petitioner, thereby affecting their ability to respond within the prescribed limitation period, under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notices and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, making them unaware of the proceedings. They relied on the judgment 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, where similar issues led to a remand. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, based on material on record, did not dispute the petitioner's contentions regarding the tab where notices and orders were uploaded. They acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra).