The Bombay High Court has quashed an Order-in-Original after finding that the adjudicating authority had passed the order without considering the taxpayer’s reply to the show cause notice due to the glitch in the GST portal. 

The Bench of Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Advait M. Sethna has observed that once it was established that the taxpayer had filed its reply, the adjudicating authority was under an obligation to examine that reply before passing any adverse order.

The petitioner challenged the Order-in-Original primarily on the ground that although it had submitted a detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice dated June 20, 2025 through the departmental GST portal, the adjudicating authority failed to consider the same while passing the final order.

According to the petitioner, the impugned order itself demonstrated that the adjudicating authority was unaware of the existence of the reply, resulting in an order being passed without considering the taxpayer’s defence. The petitioner argued that such non-consideration amounted to a clear violation of the principles of natural justice and caused serious prejudice to its rights. Accordingly, it sought quashing of the order and remand of the matter for fresh adjudication.

Buy Now: GST Inspection, Search, Seizure and Arrest With Judgements: How To Defend?

During the hearing, counsel appearing for the Union of India made a significant concession before the Court. On instructions, the Department admitted that the petitioner had indeed uploaded its reply to the Show Cause Notice on the departmental portal.

However, the Department explained that since the portal was generally managed by the jurisdictional officer, the reply was not transmitted or brought to the notice of the adjudicating authority. As a result, the adjudicating officer proceeded to decide the matter without considering the taxpayer’s submissions.

The Department fairly stated that if the Court deemed it appropriate to set aside the order and remand the matter, the authorities would comply with such directions. The petitioner also agreed to such a course of action.

The Bench noted that due to a communication gap within the Department, the reply submitted through the portal never reached the adjudicating authority. Consequently, the impugned Order-in-Original had been passed without considering the taxpayer’s defence, rendering the adjudication legally unsustainable.

The Court held that such a procedural lapse amounted to a violation of the principles of natural justice and justified judicial interference.

Allowing the writ petition, the High Court set aside the Order-in-Original dated November 13, 2025.

The Court remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority with directions to Consider the show cause reply already filed by the petitioner through the portal; Provide the petitioner with a fresh opportunity of personal hearing; Notify the date of hearing to the petitioner in advance; and Decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

The Bench also clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the dispute and that all rights and contentions of both parties remain open for consideration during the fresh adjudication.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Read More: Patna AO Had No Jurisdiction Over Kolkata Assessee: ITAT Quashes Assessments