[dated 29.07.2024, in Somaprasanth Karampudi v. Union of India, from WP no. 14969 of 2024]
The petitioner's registration was cancelled on 21.02.2019. Thereafter, proceedings related to the impugned demand order commenced. Physical notices sent to the petitioner returned with the noting "Left". Further, notices were also sent to the petitioner's registered email address.
The fact that the GST registration was cancelled and the physical notices returned should have been sufficient for the respondent to take steps to ascertain the whereabouts of the petitioner and to serve notice at such address. Further, though it cannot be said that service of notice by e-mail was not done, the fact remains that the cancellation of the GST registration could have resulted in the petitioner not checking the mails sent to such registered e-mail address.
In view of the aforesaid ambiguity, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to set out his case. Accordingly, impugned orders were set aside and remanded back for adjudication. Since the petitioner is now aware of the impugned order, the present proceedings shall be treated as notice of the pending assessment before the respondent. Further, since the petitioner approached the court belatedly, petitioner was directed to pay 10% of disputed tax as pre-deposit.