The Allahabad High Court, in a ruling, quashed a GST demand after discovering that the department had uploaded the notices and orders under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab instead of the ‘Due Notices and Orders’ tab on the GST portal.
The applicant, Ram Balak Gupta, has contested an order dated 30.11.2023 issued by the Assistant Commissioner. The counsel of the applicant claimed that they were clueless about the demand because it was not visible in the proper section of the portal, leading to a failure to challenge it in time.
The applicant laid on an earlier ruling in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. where the court had addressed an identical issue and granted relief to the taxpayer. It was claimed by the applicant that the wrong uploading of the notices breaches the norms of natural justice.
The counsel of the GST department claimed that the tax officials do not have any control over how the notices appear on the GST portal since the system was managed via the GST Network (GSTN). It was claimed by the department that the notices were available to the applicant despite when they were placed in a distinct tab.
It was noted by the bench Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra, that the applicant was qualified to the benefit of the doubt as no evidence refusing their claim that the demand notice was inaccessible under the designated section was there.
It was ruled by the court that the same misplacement deprives the applicant of having a fair chance to answer within the specified limitation period.
The court observed that already such problems are been recognized before and ruled in favour of taxpayers. The demand order has been quashed by the court and asked the assessing officer to issue a fresh notice with at least 15 days clear time for the applicant to answer.
Also, the Allahabad High Court asked that all future proceedings be performed merely post ensuring the precise notice delivery. The writ petition was permitted.
| Case Title | M/S Ram Balak Gupta vs. State of U.P. and 2 others |
| Citation | WRIT TAX No. – 975 of 2025 |
| Date | 12.03.2025 |
| Counsel for Petitioner | Vedika Nath, Yashonidhi Shukla |
| Counsel for Respondent | Ankur Agarwal |
| Allahabad High Court | Read Order |
