Email Bounce Does Not Invalidate GST Notices Service if available on Portal: Delhi HC [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court held that the uploading of GST (Goods and Services tax) notices on the official portal constitutes valid service, even if the email sent to the taxpayer bounces back.

Seven Seas Lights Pvt. Ltd., the petitioner, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 20 February 2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Shahdara Division, CGST Delhi East, which confirmed a demand of Rs. 28,86,238 for the tax period from April 2020 to March 2021.

A show cause notice dated 25 November 2024 was issued alleging excess availment of Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 25,99,696, with 25 December 2024 fixed as the last date for submission of a reply. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was never served, as the company’s domain name had expired, leading to the email bouncing back.

The counsel also submitted that the company had shifted its business from Delhi to Maharashtra, and the directors had changed, resulting in non-receipt of the notice and hearing intimation. The petitioner came to know about the order only when its authorised representative visited the GST office in June 2025.

The department’s counsel argued that the show cause notice, hearing notice, and impugned order were all uploaded on the GST portal, which constitutes valid service under law. They explained that although the email had bounced back, the taxpayer had access to the portal and should have checked the notices.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain observed that since the notices and the impugned order were available on the GST portal, the department could not be blamed for non-service.

The court pointed out that it was the responsibility of the petitioner to access the portal and take note of the proceedings. As the petitioner failed to establish that the notices were not served, the request for remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority was rejected.

The court observed that the petitioner did not have an opportunity to challenge the matter on merits. The court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority by 31 October 2025 along with the required pre-deposit.

It directed that the appeal should not be dismissed on the ground of limitation and must be considered on merits. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

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