SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25597

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
Latheesh Valangi – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner (Arrear Recovery) – Respondent
RP NO. 257 OF 2026|WP(C) NO.20384 OF 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.S.ANIL KUMAR (TRIVANDRUM), SHRI.SABU C.J, SHRI.RAHUL A.
For the Respondents: SHRI.KARTHIK S.A., CGC, SHRI.VIVEK A.V., ADDITIONAL STANDING COUNSEL, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS (ERSTWHILE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS), SRI. ALAN PRIYADARSHI DEV, GP

Uploading show cause notices in 'additional notices' portal window violates natural justice under GST service provisions.

Headnote:The review petition challenges the writ court's decision upholding the constitutionality of Sections 16(2)(c) and 16(4) of the GST Acts, while alleging non-service of show cause notices under Section 169 of the CGST/KSGST Act, uploaded only in the 'additional notices' window of the portal, preventing access and reply. Court examined portal evidence and counter affidavit, finding violation of natural justice principles as per prior ruling. Petitioner entitled to reply within three weeks, with fresh assessment ordered. Key issue: Whether show cause notices served per Section 169, allowing opportunity to respond. Ratio: Uploading notices in 'additional notices' window, not main portal, breaches natural justice, warranting remand for fresh consideration per Ramanattu Motorcorp precedent. Review petition allowed; impugned assessment order set aside to the extent of natural justice violation; fresh assessment ordered post reply.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's contention on improper show cause notice service. (Para 2)
2. court verifies notices uploaded in additional window. (Para 3)
3. natural justice violation leads to review allowance and remand. (Para 4)

O R D E R

Heard Sri. S. Anil Kumar, the learned counsel for the review petitioner, as well as Sri. Alan Priyadarshi Dev, the learned Government Pleader for the respondent herein.

2. The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition pointing out that, while disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge of this Court only answered the question as regards the constitutionality of Section 16(2)(c) and Section 16(4) of the GST Acts and Rules, deciding the issue against the petitioner. The petitioner states that, in the writ petition, he had raised a specific contention to the effect that the show cause notices, prior to the assessment under the provisions of the Statute, were not served upon him. It is the case of the petitioner that the show cause notices were not served on the portal in accordance with the provisions of Section 169 of the CGST/ KSGST Act and, in fact, those notices were served only in the Additional notices window of the portal, on account of which he could not access the show cause notice and file a reply in that regard.

3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, evidence has also been produced to show that the notices were uploaded on the portal, as evidenced by Annexure R2 series. However, on a perusal of the documents produced along with the review petition, and also in light of the averments in the petition, this Court notices that the show cause notices were uploaded only in the “additional notices” window of the portal though the afore documents were uploaded by the assessing authority in its portal.

4. Going by the principles laid down by this Court in Ramanattu Motorcorp v. State of Kerala [2025 (2) KLT 175], there is a violation of the principles of natural justice, in the above circumstances.

5. In such circumstances, I allow this review petition.

The impugned assessment order, to the extent there is violation of the principles of natural justice under Section 169 of the CGST Act , is set aside. The petitioner would be entitled to file a reply to the show cause notice within a period of three weeks from today. The assessing authority shall issue a fresh assessment order on that basis within a further period of one month thereafter.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top