GST Officers Must Apply Mind, Not Just Follow Formality in Serving Notices: Madras HC [Read Order]

The Madras High Court has observed that GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) officers must apply their mind and not treat the service of notices as a mere formality, especially when taxpayers do not respond to electronic communications.

The bench observed that “No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who is sending the repeated reminders, inspite 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.”

The petitioner, Tvl.Metro Computers, challenged the assessment order on the ground that all prior notices had been uploaded solely on the GST portal under the “View Additional Notices and Orders” section.

The petitioner claimed they were unaware of these notices and, as a result, could not file a timely response. They also expressed willingness to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount and requested the opportunity to present their case afresh.

The Government Advocate, while acknowledging that notices had indeed been uploaded on the portal, fairly conceded that no opportunity of personal hearing had been afforded before passing the impugned order. She also did not object to the matter being remanded back, subject to partial payment of tax.

The UAE Tax Law Is Evolving — Stay Ahead Before Clients Find Someone Who Already Is, Enroll Now

The Court noted that while uploading notices on the GST portal constitutes valid service under the law, such service cannot be considered effective when there is repeated non-response from the taxpayer. In such situations, the officer is expected to explore other valid modes of service under Section 169 of the GST Act such as registered post or email to ensure actual receipt and effective communication.

Justice Krishnan Ramasamy cautioned that merely fulfilling procedural formalities, without ensuring actual service, results in ineffective adjudication and unnecessary litigation, burdening both taxpayers and judicial forums. It also noted that officers must apply their minds and adopt alternate modes of service when warranted, to uphold the purpose and spirit of the GST Act.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the assessing officer, directing that fresh proceedings be initiated upon the petitioner’s payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks.

The petitioner was directed to file its reply within three weeks of payment, after which a personal hearing must be granted and a fresh order passed on merits in accordance with law.

Ms.C.Rekhakumari appeared for the petitioner and Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Advocate appeared for the department.

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