Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessment order passed under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was liable to be set aside for want of proper notice and violation of natural justice, and whether the petitioner should be relegated to an alternative remedy.
Analysis: The petitioner's GST registration had already been cancelled and was not shown to have been revived. The record did not show any physical or offline notice having been served before the adjudication order, and in the peculiar facts the Court held that the petitioner was not obliged to access the GST portal to receive e-mode notices. As the essential requirement of natural justice had not been fulfilled, keeping the writ pending or driving the petitioner to an alternative remedy would serve no useful purpose.
Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the petitioner was permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice, after which a fresh order was to be passed upon affording an opportunity of personal hearing.
Final Conclusion: The challenge succeeded on the ground of breach of natural justice, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after notice and hearing.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee's registration stands cancelled and no effective physical notice is shown to have been served, an adjudication order passed without meaningful opportunity to respond violates natural justice and cannot be sustained.