Mere Uploading GST notice on Portal Repeatedly without Ensuring Receipt by Taxpayer Cannot be Considered as Effective Service: Madras HC [Read Order]

In a recent judgment, the Madras High Court set aside a GST  ( Goods and Services Tax ) assessment order, holding that merely uploading a notice on the GST portal without ensuring its receipt by the taxpayer cannot be treated as valid service under the law.

Practical Case Studies in Forensic Accounting & Corporate Fraud Investigation Click Here

The petitioner, proprietor of Vetri Medicals, challenged the impugned order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer demanding ₹11,97,000 towards alleged wrongful Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims for FY 2017-18.

The issue came to light when the petitioner’s banker, Central Bank of India, informed him in March 2025 that his current account had been frozen due to the assessment order. It was contended that he had not received any show cause notice, and the order had been uploaded only on the GST portal without any personal intimation or delivery through recognized modes.

Also read: Auditor’s Advice on Rs. 20L Threshold Resulted in GST Registration Cancellation: Madras HC Orders Reopening of Portal for Return Filing [Read Order]

The petitioner submitted that he is willing to deposit 25% of the disputed tax if the order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication. The department, through the Government Advocate, did not oppose this proposal.

The Court noted that while the law permits service of notices through electronic modes, it also requires authorities to act diligently if no response is received. It observed that repeated uploading of notices without verifying their receipt by the assessee reflects a mechanical and ineffective mode of compliance, leading to unnecessary litigation and hardship.

Also read: Allahabad HC Slams VAT Assessing Authority for Copy-Paste Orders Ignoring Remand Directions, Orders Appropriate Action by Pr. Secretary [Read Order]

“Mere uploading notice repeatedly without ensuring their receipt by the petitioner cannot be considered as effective service. Such mechanical compliance does not serve any useful purpose and the same will only lead to multiplicity of litigations, wasting not only the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate Authority / Tribunal and this Court as well. Thus, when there was no response from the tax payer to the notice uploaded in the portal, the Officer should have sent the notice through RPAD, which would have served the purpose” said Justice N. Mala. 

Practical Case Studies in Forensic Accounting & Corporate Fraud Investigation Click Here

The Court also stated that if the taxpayer did not respond to portal notices, the department should have followed up by serving the notice through other legally recognized means, such as Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due (RPAD), as prescribed under Section 169 of the GST Act.

Also read: No Allegation of Suppression or Fraud in GST S. 74 SCN: Madras HC directs to Treat S.74 Notice as S. 73 notice Enabling to Avail Amnesty Scheme[Read Order]

The High Court set aside the GST assessment order citing a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. It directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within two weeks, following which the GST department must instruct the petitioner’s bank to unfreeze the account.

The petitioner is also directed to submit a detailed reply with supporting documents within the next two weeks. The department must then issue a 14-day notice for personal hearing and pass a fresh, reasoned order in accordance with law.

Also read:  No GST Input Mismatch Details or Hearing Given: Madras HC directs to Re-do Assessment Order on 10% Deposit [Read Order]

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates