The Madras High Court has held that simply uploading notices to the GST portal is not enough, especially when a taxpayer’s GST registration has been cancelled.
The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy has observed that when there is no response to an online/Portal notice, officers should explore other communication methods, like Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due (RPAD), to ensure effective service. This decision prevents “ex parte” orders passed on “empty formalities” and helps reduce unnecessary litigation.
Based on the voluntary request made by the petitioner, their GST Registration was cancelled on 11.04.2022. Subsequent to the cancellation, all notices/communications were uploaded in the GST common portal. Since the petitioner was not aware of the said notices, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the order came to be passed by the department without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
The department submitted that the department had uploaded the notices in the GST Online Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, she has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. That apart, since the notices were issued subsequent to the cancellation of GST Registration of the petitioner, she requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondent, subject to the payment of 10% of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.
The show cause notice was uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the issuance of the said show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the assessment order came to be passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice.
The court noted that no doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who is sending the repeated reminders, in spite of the fact that no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., the Officer should have applied his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes prescribed in Section 169 of the GST Act, which are also the valid mode of service under the Act, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it would only fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities will not serve any useful purpose and the same will only pave way for multiplicity of litigations, not only wasting the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate Authority/Tribunal and this Court as well.
The court held that the order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner shall pay 10% of disputed tax amount to the
respondent within a period of four weeks.
Case Details
Case Title:M/s.Sekar Stores versus Deputy State Tax Officer-1
Case No.: W.P.No.29685 of 2025 & W.M.P.Nos.33287 & 33288 of 2025
Date: 08.08.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: M.A.Mudimannan
Counsel For Respondent: K.Vasanthamala
