TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 202
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the assessment order dated 19.2.2025 passed by Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector- 20, Lucknow under Section 73 of Goods and Services Tax (GST) and also consequential order dated 11.6.2025 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Khand-20, Lucknow wherein the bank account of the petitioner has been freezed. 5. It has been submitted that the petitioner is running a 5 star Hotel at Lucknow which is registered with GST Department. The present dispute pertains to period April, 2020 to March, 2021 where the assessment proceedings were conducted by the assessing officer. It has been submitted that notices were issued to the petitioner on e-mail and mobile number provided by him at the time of registration under the GST Act. Without receiving any reply/response from the petitioner the assessing authority proceeded to make ex-parte assessment by means of the impugned order dated 19.2.2025. 6. Petitioner submits that he did not receive any communication or any of the notices sent by the assessing authority. At the time of registration with the authority is under the GST A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or, including tendering it directly or by a messenger including a courier to the addressee or sending it by registered post or speed post or by sending to the e mail address made available at the time of registration, or by making it available on the common portal or by publication in a news paper circulating in the locality. It is further stated that if the service cannot be effected by any of the aforesaid modes, by affixing it in some conspicuous place at his last known place of business or residence and if such mode is not practicable for any reason, then by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the office of the concerned officer or authority who passed such decision or order or issued such summons or notice. He further submits that as per clause (2) of Section 169 it is provided that every decision, order, summons, notice or any communication shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which it is tendered or published or a copy thereof is affixed in the manner provided in sub - section (1). It has further been made clear that communication has to be made by one of the modes provided for under Section 169 and once the respondents have sent communication throug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f business or residence; or (c) by sending a communication to his e-mail address provided at the time of registration or as amended from time to time; or (d) by making it available on the common portal; or (e) by publication in a newspaper circulating in the locality in which the taxable person or the person to whom it is issued is last known to have resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain; or (f) if none of the modes aforesaid is practicable, by affixing it in some conspicuous place at his last known place of business or residence and if such mode is not practicable for any reason, then by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the office of the concerned officer or authority who or which passed such decision or order or issued such summons or notice. (2) Every decision, order, summons, notice or any communication shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which it is tendered or published or a copy thereof is affixed in the manner provided in sub-section (1). (3) When such decision, order, summons, notice or any communication is sent by registered post or speed post, it shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee at the ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e amount as directed by the assessing authority, nor did he reply to the notice and accordingly in the aforesaid circumstances the matter was heard ex - parte and decided by the impugned order dated 19/02/2025 which has been assailed in the present writ petition. 15. We find that the petitioner was duly communicated by the tax department as per the modes prescribed under Section 169, and therefore, it cannot be said that there was any violation of principles of natural justice. While interpreting the provision of section 169 we will also have to consider Section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. According to Section 13 (2) electronic record deemed to be received when it enters the designated computer recourse. Similarly, as per section 13(3) unless it is otherwise agreed between the parties and electronic record is deemed to be dispatched at the place of the originator has his place of business is deemed to be received at the place of the addressee has his place of business. Section 13 of Information Technology Act, 2000 is being reproduced as under :- "13. Time and place of despatch and receipt of electronic record.-(1) Save as otherwise agreed to between the originat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nnot be held be responsible for not giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 17. Considering the submissions made with regard to existence of an alternate remedy it would be beneficial to rely upon the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others Vs. Commercial Steel Limited, (2022) 16 Supreme Court Cases 447 where in similar circumstances following observations are made:- "10. The respondent had a statutory remedy under Section 107. Instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition under Article 226. The existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. But a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional circumstances where there is: (i) a breach of fundamental rights; (ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. 11. In the present case, none of the above exceptions was established. There was, in fact, no violation of the principles of natural justice since a notice w....