Naveen Krishi Kendra vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 2434 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Naveen Krishi Kendra vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2025

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPT No. 43 of 2025 PRIYANKA VERMA NAVEEN KRISHI KENDRA versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Order Sheet

12/03/2025 Mr. Ritesh Sharma, counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, GA for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no notice has been served to the petitioner under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 100(2) and 142(1)(a) of the Rules, 2017. He submits that when a phone call had been received by the petitioner on 04.03.2025 from the GST Department about the order passed for the demand notice for payment of Rs.3,41,352/-, the petitioner contacted his Chartered Accountant and came to know that a notice had been uploaded on the web portal. He further submits that no intimation was given through physical mode or through e- mail. He would further submit that on 06.03.2025 this Court in WPT No.42/2025 placing reliance in the judgment of

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.(MD). No.26481/2024 and other connected matters (Udumalpet Sarvodaya Sangham vs. The Authority, Under Shop and Establishment Act and Anr.) vide order dated 06.01.2025 interpreted Section 169 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short "the Act, 2017") by observing that Sub- Section (1) of Section 169 would mean that Clauses (a) to (c) would be alternative and if it was not practicable, then Clauses (d) to (f) would have to be followed.

Learned State counsel also submits that from reading of Section 169 of the Act, 2017, it is explicit that uploading of orders on the common web portal constitutes proper mode of service and any mode of service contemplated under Section 169 is sufficient and there are various alternative mode of service to the assessee.

Countering the said submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that fresh notice may be issued to the petitioner in terms of Section 73(9) of the Act, 2017 to enable him to file the proper reply, therefore, he orally prays that till adjudication of this Petition, an interim relief may be granted.

However at this juncture, learned State counsel opposes the aforesaid submission and prays for time to seek instructions in this regard and also to file reply.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that a strong case is made out for grant

of interim relief.

Accordingly, it is directed that effect and operation of the impugned Demand orders dated 20.05.2024 and 29.07.2024 issued by the Assessing Authority shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.

List this matter in the week commencing on 21.04.2025.

Meanwhile, reply shall be filed within a period of 3 weeks.

Sd/-

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

Priyanka