2020 (12) TMI 135 - HC - GST

Service of copy of order u/s 169 - Confiscation of goods alongwith vehicle - goods were not accompanied by the requisite E-way Bill-01 - contention of petitioner is that admittedly the copy of the order was served upon the driver of the truck, who, by no stretch of imagination, can be termed as representative of the petitioner - HELD THAT - As per section 169 of UPGST Act, it is clear that service on the driver would not fall within any of the category specified from the Clause a to f of Section 169 (1) of the Act. The order impugned in the present writ petition is wholly arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the mandate of Section 169 of the Act - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order dated 30.11.2019 passed in GST Appeal No. 58 of 2019, A.Y. 2018-2019 on grounds of limitation and service of notice.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer, challenged an order dated 30.11.2019 passed by Respondent No. 1 in GST Appeal No. 58 of 2019, A.Y. 2018-2019, seeking relief through a Writ of Certiorari and Mandamus. The petitioner alleged that the order dated 15.3.2018 under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was passed against them without proper service of notice. The appeal against this order was dismissed by Respondent No. 1 on grounds of limitation as per Section 107(1) and 107(4) of the Act. The petitioner contended that the limitation period should have started from the date they obtained a certified copy of the order, not from the date it was served on the driver of the truck. The petitioner relied on a previous judgment to support their argument that service on the driver does not constitute valid service as per Section 169 of the Act.

The Court analyzed Section 169 of the Act, which specifies the manner of service of notice, decision, order, or summons. It noted that service on the driver did not fall within the methods listed in Section 169(1), rendering the order dated 30.11.2019 arbitrary and illegal. The Court held that the impugned order was against the mandate of the Act and set it aside. The appellate authority was directed to hear and decide the appeal on its merits without considering the question of limitation. The Court emphasized expeditious resolution of the appeal in accordance with the law.

In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, and the order dated 30.11.2019 was set aside. The appellate authority was instructed to proceed with the GST Appeal No. 58 of 2019 A.Y. 2018-2019 in compliance with the law, focusing on the merits of the case without delving into the limitation issue. The Court's decision aimed to ensure justice and adherence to legal procedures in the resolution of the appeal.