Procedural Error Invalidates GST Notice: Incorrect Portal Upload Leads to Order Quashing and Fresh Proceedings

The HC allowed the writ petition challenging GST orders due to incorrect notice uploading on the portal's wrong tab. The court quashed the Assistant Commissioner's orders and directed issuance of a fresh notice, requiring the petitioner to submit a written reply within two weeks. The Assessing Officer must issue a reasoned order within one month, with the disputed amount already deposited with the State Government.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to orders passed by Assistant Commissioner under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 due to non-uploading of notices on the correct portal tab.

Analysis:
The petition challenges orders dated 27.12.2023 and 02.02.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner under Section 73 of the GST Act. The petitioner argues that notices were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab instead of the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, leading to lack of awareness and inability to respond within the limitation period. Reference is made to a previous judgment, Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., which emphasized the importance of correct notice uploading. The Department does not dispute the incorrect uploading of notices and acknowledges the relevance of the Ola Fleet judgment.

In the case of Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd., it was observed that the issue revolved around the due communication of the impugned order, which was not uploaded in the correct manner on the assessee's portal. The petitioner contends that this prevented seeking a remedy within the limitation period. The Department, represented by the Standing Counsel, argues that the assessing officer cannot be blamed for the error in uploading notices, as the web portal design is managed by the GST Network. The petitioner is granted the benefit of doubt regarding the non-reflection of the impugned order under the correct tab.

The judgment allows the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner. A direction is given for the Assessing Officer to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner in accordance with the law, allowing for further proceedings. The petitioner is required to treat the impugned order as the final notice and submit a written reply within two weeks, with the Assessing Officer expected to issue a reasoned order within one month from the service of notice on the petitioner. The disputed amount is noted to be deposited with the State Government, resulting in no outstanding demand.

In conclusion, the writ petition is allowed based on the incorrect uploading of notices, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders and the initiation of further proceedings with proper notice and compliance with legal requirements.

---