2025 (2) TMI 1004 - HC - GST

Non-service of SCN - notices issued under Section 73 of the Act were uploaded on Additional Notices and Orders Tab of the G.S.T. Portal - petitioner being unaware of issuance of the notices as well as passing of the order could neither appear before the authority nor question the validity of the impugned order within the period of limitation - HELD THAT - In the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd 2024 (7) TMI 1543 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT a coordinate Bench of this Court inter alia observed and held that 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 order impugned dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner State Tax Sector 8 Varanasi (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) is quashed and set aside - petition allowed.

Summary

The petition before the Allahabad High Court challenged an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, creating a demand against the petitioner. The main contention raised was that the notices issued under Section 73 were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' Tab of the GST Portal, leading to the petitioner being unaware of the notices and the order, thus unable to appear before the authority or question the validity of the order within the limitation period.The petitioner relied on a previous judgment in the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd., where a similar issue regarding the uploading of notices was considered, and the petitioner was granted the benefit of doubt, leading to a remand back to the authority.The Department, through its counsel, did not dispute the contentions raised by the petitioner regarding the uploading of notices and orders on the wrong tab and acknowledged that the issue was covered by the judgment in the Ola Fleet Technologies case.In the Ola Fleet Technologies case, the Court observed that the dispute revolved around the due communication of the impugned order, which was not uploaded in the correct manner on the assessee's portal. The Court noted that the assessing officer may not be to blame for the error, as the web portal did not provide the option to upload the order in a manner visible to the assessee. The Court ultimately found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt and disposed of the petition, directing the assessee to treat the impugned order as the final notice and submit a written reply within two weeks.Considering the submissions and the judgment in the Ola Fleet Technologies case, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in accordance with the law, with further proceedings to take place based on the said notice.In conclusion, the High Court's judgment focused on the procedural irregularity in the uploading of notices and orders on the GST Portal, leading to the petitioner's lack of awareness and inability to challenge the order within the limitation period. The Court emphasized the importance of proper communication and access to relevant documents for the parties involved in tax matters.