Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy, J
Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I – Respondent
ORDER :
Krishnan Ramasamy, J.
Heard Mr.R.Ganesh Kanna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms..Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran learned Government Advocate (T) who takes notice on behalf of the respondent. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order of assessment passed by the respondent in DRC-07 dated 24.08.2024 and to quash the same and further, to direct the respondent to lift the bank attachment notice issued in Form DRC-13 dated 05.02.2025 on the petitioner's banker.
3. Mr.R.Ganesh Kanna, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent issued a show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 22.05.2024, which has been uploaded in the GST Portal under the Column ''View Additional Notices/Orders'' instead of usual column ''View Notices/Orders'', and hence, the said notice was unnoticed by the petitioner; that thereafter, the respondent also sent reminders dated 26.06.2024, 19.07.2024 and 19.08.2024, and since the same have also been uploaded in the GST Portal under the said different Column, those notices have also been unnoticed by the petitioner, howev
The court held that service of notices via an online portal under an unusual column is insufficient, violating principles of natural justice, leading to the annulment of the ex parte order.
Effective service of notice under the GST Act is critical, with failure to serve properly resulting in quashing of demand and recognition of violation of natural justice principles.
The court emphasized the necessity of effective notice service to uphold natural justice, ruling that failure to provide a fair opportunity to respond invalidates the impugned order.
Effective communication of adjudication orders is essential for initiating limitation under GST laws, and electronic service via the Common Portal alone does not satisfy this requirement.
The court upheld that notification via the common portal is sufficient under Section 169(1)(d) of the GST Act, but emphasized the necessity of effective communication methods to uphold principles of ....
The failure to provide valid notice and opportunity to be heard constitutes a violation of natural justice, necessitating quashing of ex parte orders under the GST Act.
The court held that lack of proper service of notice due to vagueness in the GST portal's structure violated the principles of natural justice.
Service of show cause notice and order under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 requires proof of delivery to ensure proper service. The provisions of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
