Yudhbir Singh vs. The State Of Hp

Held

The Court directed the respondents to serve the impugned order upon the petitioner in consonance with the provisions of Section 169 of the HPGST Act, 2017. Regarding the issue of limitation, the Court explicitly stated that if applicable, it shall be reckoned from the date of service of the impugned order upon the petitioner. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion with respect to the limitation period applicable either to the respondents in passing the impugned order or to the petitioner in challenging the same. All such issues were left open to be considered and decided by the competent authority or the appropriate forum, as and when raised. Consequently, the petition was disposed of in these terms.

Facts

The petitioner, Yudhbir Singh, approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking to quash an adjudication order and the attachment of his bank account. The petitioner contended that the adjudication order, passed by the Proper Officer on January 22, 2021, was never served upon him in accordance with Section 169 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The State, represented by the Advocate General, placed on record instructions from the Department of State Taxes and Excise acknowledging that the order could not be uploaded on the portal, thus the petitioner remained unaware of it. The State also submitted a communication withdrawing the notice of recovery under Section 79(1)(c) of the HPGST Act, 2017, requesting the bank to allow normal functioning of the petitioner's account.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order passed by the Proper Officer on January 22, 2021, is liable to be quashed for non-service upon the petitioner in accordance with Section 169 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the attachment of the petitioner's bank account made under Section 79 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the adjudication order was invalid as it was not served upon him as per the mandatory provisions of Section 169 of the HPGST Act, 2017. He also sought the quashing of the bank account attachment. Revenue's Arguments: The State acknowledged that the adjudication order could not be uploaded on the portal and the petitioner remained uninformed. The State also produced a communication withdrawing the notice of recovery under Section 79(1)(c) of the HPGST Act, 2017, and requested the bank to revoke the restrictions on the petitioner's account.