The Delhi High Court has set aside two GST assessment orders holding that the taxpayer was denied a meaningful opportunity to respond after show cause notices (SCNs) were uploaded only under the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal. The method of communication did not amount to effective service of notice and resulted in violation of principles of natural justice.
The bench of Justice Ajay Digpaul and Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre noted that although changes were made to the GST portal after January 16, 2024 to improve visibility of the “Additional Notices” tab, the petitioner’s grievance still warranted consideration. The Court held that the interests of justice required granting the taxpayer an opportunity to file replies and contest the matter on merits.
The writ petitions challenged orders issued for the financial years 2017–18 and 2019–20 by the Sales Tax Officer, Delhi. The petitioner argued that the SCNs dated September 23, 2023 and May 28, 2024 were not properly brought to its attention because they were uploaded only in the “Additional Notices” section of the GST portal. Consequently, no replies were filed and the orders were passed ex parte.
The Court observed that similar disputes had arisen earlier where notices uploaded in less visible sections of the GST portal failed to effectively notify taxpayers. It emphasized that adjudication should take place on merits and not merely due to non-response caused by lack of proper notice.
The Court set aside the impugned orders and granted the petitioner four weeks to submit replies to the show cause notices. The adjudicating authority was directed to issue fresh hearing notices through email and registered mobile number and to pass fresh orders after considering the petitioner’s submissions.
The Court also directed that access to the GST portal be provided to the petitioner within one week to enable filing of replies and reviewing relevant documents. It clarified that the issue concerning the validity of certain notifications remains open and that any fresh orders would be subject to the outcome of pending proceedings before higher courts.
Case Details
Case Title: Jarosniv Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Sales Tax Officer Class II AVATO
Citation: JURISHOUR-55-HC-2026(Del)
Case No.: W.P.(C) 2200/2026 & CM APPL. 10696/2026, CM APPL. 10697/2026
Date: 16th February, 2026
Counsel For Petitioner: Muhammad Ali Khan
Counsel For Respondent: Sumit K. Batra
