GST Demand Order Set Aside Due to Notice Uploaded on  GST portal under  “Additional notices and orders” Tab

By | January 24, 2025
(Last Updated On: January 24, 2025)

GST Demand Order Set Aside Due to Notice Uploaded on  GST portal under  “Additional notices and orders” Tab

Summary in Key Points:

  • Issue: Whether a GST demand order passed under Section 73 is valid when the assessee was not properly served with the notices, leading to a violation of natural justice.
  • Facts: The assessee argued that the notices issued under Section 73 were only uploaded on the GST portal under the “additional notices and orders” tab. As a result, the assessee remained unaware of the notices and could not respond or challenge the demand order within the stipulated time.
  • Decision: The High Court, relying on the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., set aside the demand order due to the lack of proper service of notice.

Decision:

The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the impugned demand order. The court emphasized the importance of proper service of notice to ensure that the assessee is aware of the proceedings and has an opportunity to respond. The court followed the precedent set in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., where a similar issue was addressed, and the assessee was given the benefit of the doubt.

Important Note: This case highlights the significance of proper service of notice in GST proceedings. While electronic service through the GST portal is permissible, it must be done in a manner that ensures actual awareness by the assessee. Failure to do so can lead to a violation of natural justice and invalidate the subsequent orders. This case serves as a reminder to the tax authorities to ensure effective communication and provide taxpayers a fair chance to present their case.

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
National Gas Service
v.
State of U.P.
Arun Bhansali, CJ.
and Vikas Budhwar, J.
WRIT TAX No. – 2409 of 2024
DECEMBER  20, 2024
Shrinath, for the Petitioner. Ankur Agarwal, S.C. for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. This petition is directed against order dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Division-7, Prayagraj under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 whereby demand has been created against the petitioner.
2. Submission has been made that notices issued under Section 73 of the Act, were uploaded on ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ Tab of the G.S.T. Portal, which is evident from Annexure-6 to the petition and consequently, the petitioner being unaware of issuance of the notices as well as passing of the orders, could neither appear before the authority nor question the validity of the impugned orders within the period of limitation.
3. Submission has been made that this Court in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & 2 others, Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024 decided on 22.7.2024 taking note of the said aspect of the matter wherein notices have not been uploaded on the ‘Due Notices and Orders’ and instead uploaded on ‘Additional Notices and Orders’, came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of doubt and consequently, the matter has been remanded back to the authority.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Department based on the material available on record does not dispute the contentions raised pertaining to uploading of the notices and orders on the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ Tab instead of ‘Due Notices and Orders’ Tab and the fact that the issue as raised is covered by judgement in the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd (supra).
5. In the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd (supra) a coordinate Bench of this Court inter alia observed and came to the following conclusion:-
“4. Ultimately, vide last order dated 05.04.2024 the dispute between the parties boiled down to the issue due communication of the impugned order dated 12.07.2023. The petitioner claims that the same was not uploaded in the manner required inasmuch as the impugned order does not show up on the asseseess portal under the tab “view notices and orders”. Rather, it reflects under the other tab for “additional notice and orders”.
5. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner could not seek appropriate remedy against that order, within limitation. Reliance is placed on an earlier order of the Court in Writ Tax No.551 of 2023 (M/s Mohini Traders v. State of U.P. and Another) decided on 03.05.2023 [Neutral Citation No.2023:AHC:115008-DB].
6. On the other hand upon written instructions received learned Standing Counsel would contend that the assessing officer is not to blame for any error being cited by the assessee. Referring to the web portal available to the assessing officer, it had been indicated that there is no option/ choice available to the assessing officer to upload the order in the manner that it may reflect under any one of the particular tabs visible to the assessee. On query made, Shri Ankur Agarwal fairly states that if it all issue may have to be addressed by the GST Network a separate entity constituted to design maintain and run the web portal.
7. At present, it does appear that the petitioner is entitled to a benefit of doubt. No material exist to reject the contention being advanced that the impugned order was not reflecting under the tab “view notices and orders”. On merits, as noted in the earlier orders an other dispute exists whether all replies and annexures to the replies as filed by the assessee were displayed to the assessing officer and whether those have been considered. We find, no useful purpose may be served for keeping this petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit or even relegating the petitioner to the available statutory remedy. The entire disputed amount is lying in deposit with the State Government. Therefore, there is no outstanding demand. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with a direction, the assessee may treat the impugned order as the final notice and submit his written reply within a period of two weeks. Thereupon the assessing officer may issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in the manner prescribed with at least fifteen days clear notice. The petitioner undertakes to appear on the date fixed. Appropriate reasoned and speaking order may be passed within a further period of one month from the date of service of notice on the petitioner.”

6. In view of the submissions made and the judgement in the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order impugned dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Division-7, Prayagraj (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) is quashed and set aside.

7. The Assessing Officer may issue a fresh at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioner in the manner prescribed in accordance with law and based on the said notice, further proceedings may take place.

Category: Home

About CA Satbir Singh

Chartered Accountant having 12+ years of Experience in Taxation , Finance and GST related matters and can be reached at Email : Taxheal@gmail.com