Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

GST SCN and Demand Order Issued When ‘Additional Notices’ Tab Not Clearly Visible on Portal: Delhi HC Remands Matter [Read Order]

The Delhi High Court held that GST demand orders cannot stand when notices are uploaded under the “Additional Notices” tab that was not clearly visible on the GST portal

Kavi Priya
GST SCN and Demand Order Issued When ‘Additional Notices’ Tab Not Clearly Visible on Portal: Delhi HC Remands Matter [Read Order]
X

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court held that a GST show cause notice and the demand order could not be sustained where they were issued at a time when the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal was not clearly visible, and the taxpayer was not given a proper opportunity of personal hearing. Aryansh Alloys, through its proprietor, filed a writ petition before the...


In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court held that a GST show cause notice and the demand order could not be sustained where they were issued at a time when the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal was not clearly visible, and the taxpayer was not given a proper opportunity of personal hearing.

Aryansh Alloys, through its proprietor, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a show cause notice dated 23 September 2023 and a demand order dated 26 December 2023 passed by the Delhi GST authorities. The proceedings related to the GST period from July 2017 to March 2018, under which tax, interest, and penalty were demanded from the petitioner.

The petitioner also challenged certain GST notifications that extended limitation periods for adjudication. The Court was informed that the validity of these notifications was already under consideration before the Supreme Court, and conflicting views had been taken by different High Courts.

On facts, the petitioner stated that replies to the show cause notice were filed on 23 October 2023 and 21 December 2023. It was argued that the show cause notice did not specify any date for personal hearing, and the column relating to personal hearing was left blank.

The petitioner’s counsel further argued that both the show cause notice and the demand order were uploaded only under the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal, which was not clearly visible at the relevant time. The counsel was not aware of the proceedings and did not get an effective opportunity to present its case.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the demand order was passed without granting a personal hearing and in violation of principles of natural justice. They also submitted that the order did not come to the petitioner’s knowledge in time due to the manner in which it was uploaded on the portal.

After hearing the matter, the Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain observed that at the time when the show cause notice and the demand order were issued, the “Additional Notices” tab on the GST portal was not clearly visible. The court pointed out that the petitioner did not appear to have received a fair opportunity to be heard before the demand was confirmed.

Built for GST appeals—not theory, but what actually works in Tribunal. Click here

Keeping this in view, the court set aside the impugned demand order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority. The petitioner was granted time till 31 January 2026 to file a fresh reply to the show cause notice.

The adjudicating authority was directed to issue a proper notice for personal hearing and to communicate it through email and mobile details provided by the petitioner. The issue relating to the validity of the impugned notifications was left open and made subject to the outcome of the proceedings pending before the Supreme Court.

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

ARYANSH ALLOYS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR vs COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX , W.P.(C) 19472/2025, CM APPL. 81196/2025 , W.P.(C) 19472/2025, CM APPL. 81196/2025 , 23 December 2023 , Rakesh Kumar
ARYANSH ALLOYS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR vs COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
CITATION :  W.P.(C) 19472/2025, CM APPL. 81196/2025Case Number :  W.P.(C) 19472/2025, CM APPL. 81196/2025Date of Judgement :  23 December 2023Coram :  PRATHIBA M. SINGHCounsel of Appellant :  Rakesh Kumar
Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019