Pawan Kumar Jain And Company Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court addressed a petition filed by Pawan Kumar Jain and Company, challenging an appellate order that upheld a GST assessment order passed under Section 73 of the GST Act. The petitioner argued that the initial assessment order, which imposed tax liability, interest, and penalty, was entirely ex parte as they were never properly served with the show cause notice. The petitioner claimed to have only become aware of the proceedings when the assessment order was uploaded to their dashboard under “view additional notices and orders,” and consequently, they could not file a timely response. The petitioner also stated that the assessment order was not communicated via email. Upon discovering the order in May 2024, the petitioner immediately filed an appeal, which was subsequently rejected by the first appellate authority as being time-barred due to the alleged lack of prior notice.
The petitioner’s counsel contended that the issue of non-service of the show cause notice, particularly when it does not appear under the ‘view notices and orders’ tab on the GST portal, leading to a party being unable to defend themselves against tax liability, is a settled matter. They cited several decisions of the Allahabad High Court, including Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Others, Shyam Roshan Transport v. State of U.P. and 2 Others, and Atul Agrwal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others, where similar ex parte orders were challenged due to lack of proper notice. In these cases, the High Court had held that a party facing tax liability in an ex parte order should at least be given an opportunity to present their defense and relevant documents. Following this precedent, the Allahabad High Court in the present case directed that the assessment order dated December 30, 2023, be treated as the show cause notice under Section 73 of the GST Act. The court instructed the petitioner to file their objections and supporting documents within eight weeks, and directed the assessing officer to then consider these submissions, provide a hearing, and pass a fresh order within the following four weeks.
