Facts of the Case
The petitioner, M/S Raja Constructions, through its proprietor Shabahat Husain, along with a second petitioner, challenged an order dated 23.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State GST, Lucknow Sector-II, under Section 73 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, creating a demand for the financial year 2018-19, along with a consequential recovery order dated 02.06.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State GST, Sector-II, Lucknow, under Section 79 of the GST Act. The show cause notice underlying the demand had been issued as far back as 2023. The petitioner's case was that both the notice and the subsequent order were uploaded only on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab of the GST portal rather than the 'Due Notices and Orders' tab, so it remained wholly unaware of the proceedings and could neither respond to the notice nor challenge the resulting order within the period of limitation.
Issues Involved
- Whether the Section 73 demand order and the consequential Section 79 recovery order can survive where the underlying notice was uploaded solely under 'Additional Notices and Orders' on the GST portal.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the coordinate Bench ruling in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. on identical facts.
Petitioner's Arguments
- Since the notice was placed only under 'Additional Notices and Orders' and not 'Due Notices and Orders', the petitioner had no real opportunity to respond within limitation.
- The controversy was identical to, and covered by, Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024, decided on 22.07.2024.
Respondent's Arguments
- Learned counsel for the Department did not dispute that the notice and orders were uploaded on the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, and fairly accepted that the issue was covered by Ola Fleet Technologies.
Court Order / Findings
- Following its earlier ruling in Ola Fleet Technologies, the Court held the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding non-communication of the notice, since no material rebutted the claim that it did not appear under 'view notices and orders'.
- The Court found no useful purpose in retaining the petition, calling for a counter affidavit, or relegating the petitioner to the statutory remedy.
- Both the Section 73 order dated 23.04.2024 and the Section 79 recovery order dated 02.06.2025 were quashed and set aside, and the writ petition allowed.
- The Assessing Officer was directed to issue a fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear notice, in the manner prescribed, before proceeding further.
Important Clarification
- A demand created under Section 73 and any consequential recovery action under Section 79 both fall if the foundational notice was never effectively communicated because it was uploaded only under 'Additional Notices and Orders'; the recovery order cannot survive independently of the assessment it enforces.
- This line of Allahabad High Court rulings continues to give assessees the benefit of doubt on portal-notice visibility issues rather than treating limitation as an absolute bar, even where — as here — the demand traces back to a show cause notice issued several years earlier.
Sections Involved
- Section 73, UPGST Act, 2017 – determination of tax not paid for reasons other than fraud.
- Section 79, CGST Act, 2017 – recovery of tax, invoked here as a consequential order following the Section 73 demand.
- GST common portal notice tabs ('Due Notices and Orders' vs. 'Additional Notices and Orders') as the recurring point of dispute on effective service.
Decision – In Favour of
Allowed in favour of the Assessee — both the demand order and the consequential recovery order were quashed and the matter remanded for fresh notice and adjudication.
Case Details
- Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
- Case No.: Writ Tax No. 1450 of 2025
- Coram: Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf, J. and Hon'ble Manjive Shukla, J.
- Date of Order: 16 December 2025
Link to Download the Order
Click here to view/download the full order
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment