Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/S Nivshakti Bioenergy Pvt. Ltd., through its authorized signatory Mahendra Singh Yadav, challenged an order dated 22.08.2024 passed under Section 73 of the GST Act, along with an appellate order dated 30.08.2025 dismissing its appeal as beyond limitation. The petitioner's case was that no opportunity of hearing was granted before the order was passed, since the show cause notice had been uploaded only on the GST portal's 'additional tab', where it could not reasonably be noticed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Section 73 order was valid where the underlying show cause notice was uploaded only on the portal's 'additional tab' rather than the tab an assessee would ordinarily monitor.
  2. Whether the time-barred appellate rejection should stand despite this procedural defect at the original adjudication stage.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No opportunity of hearing was granted while passing the order under Section 73, since the show cause notice was uploaded on the 'additional tab' and could not be noticed by the petitioner.
  • The issue was squarely covered by the Court's judgment in Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. (Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024, dated 22.07.2024).

Respondent's Arguments

  • The learned Standing Counsel for the State, on instructions, was not in a position to dispute that the SCN had been uploaded only on the additional tab, as alleged by the petitioner.

Court Order / Findings

  • On the sole ground that the SCN was uploaded on the additional tab and following Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P., the Court allowed the petition.
  • Both the original order dated 22.08.2024 and the appellate order dated 30.08.2025 were quashed.
  • The matter was remanded to the assessing authority to pass a fresh order after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Important Clarification

  • Where a show cause notice is uploaded only on the GST portal's 'additional notices' tab, rather than the primary tab an assessee ordinarily checks, service is treated as defective, entitling the assessee to a fresh opportunity.
  • Consistent with a line of Allahabad High Court rulings (Ola Fleet Technologies, Mohini Traders), such procedural infirmity justifies quashing both the original order and any appellate rejection based on limitation.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, GST Act, 2017 — determination of tax, requiring proper service of the show cause notice.
  • Section 169, CGST Act, 2017 — modes of service of notice under the Act.

Decision – In Favour of

Assessee. Both orders were quashed and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after hearing.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Case No.: Writ Tax No. 938 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia, J.
Date of Order: 19.09.2025

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.