2024 (7) TMI 1241

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.14453 of 2024 dated 03.06.2024 insofar as it has denied the discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution on the premise that the appellant has filed the writ petition challenging the order dated 09.01.2019 only on 24.05.2024 i.e., almost 5 years after the impugned order came to be passed. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the order dated 09.01.2019 was challenged primarily on the ground that the same was not communicated to the appellant through any mode including uploading on the GST portal. The appellant was served with the garnishee notice on 15.05.2024 and it was only thereafter that the appellant requested the 1st Respondent to furnish a certified c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rvice of the notice and the impugned order as contemplated under the GST Act and the Rules. It is trite law that service of notice or order is essentially a question of fact (Union of India v. Pramod Gupta, (2005) 12 SCC 1 : Niranjan Agarwalla v. Union of India, 1960 SCC OnLine Cal 111 :). It is equally true that valid service of notice or order goes to the root of jurisdiction (Gopal Oil Mills v. Assessing Authority, Ludhiana,, 1984 SCC OnLine P&H 837; Jaipur Udyog Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officer, 1979 SCC OnLine Raj 231 Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Bombay v. Shrimal Sakharchand, 1984 SCC OnLine Bom 446;). It is also relevant to note that knowledge of a proceeding cannot be a substitute for service (Union of India v. Deep....