Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
In the digital age of taxation, GST authorities increasingly rely on online portals for communication. But a pressing question arises: Is the uploading of notice in the portal alone sufficient notice under the law? This issue has sparked numerous court battles, particularly under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. Taxpayers often challenge orders claiming they were unaware of notices buried in the GST portal, raising concerns about natural justice and procedural fairness.
This blog explores the legal nuances, drawing from key judicial precedents and statutory provisions. While uploading on the common portal is an authorized mode, courts typically emphasize effective communication to the recipient. Note: This is general information based on reported cases and should not be construed as specific legal advice. Consult a qualified professional for your situation.
Uploading a notice on the GST portal alone is not universally considered sufficient legal service. Its validity hinges on adherence to prescribed modes under Section 169 of the CGST Act and whether it effectively reaches the recipient, upholding principles of natural justice. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037
Key points include:- Service must conform to statutory methods and ensure actual communication.- Mere portal upload may fail if the assessee doesn't regularly check it.- Natural justice demands a fair chance to respond, which portal-only service might not provide. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037
Section 169 outlines multiple service modes: hand delivery, registered post, email, publication, or affixing at the last known address. Notably, it includes making notices available on the common portal. However, courts stress that initial attempts should use direct methods like tendering personally, courier, registered post, or email before relying solely on the portal. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037
The critical test is effectiveness. As one court observed: unless the portal upload is supplemented with actual notification (e.g., email, physical delivery), the recipient may remain unaware, especially if they do not regularly monitor the portal. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037
Many assessees lack technical savvy or constant monitoring by representatives. Courts have ruled: unless the assessee possesses the technical knowledge, he may not be in a position to have access of GST portal or to go through his e-mail. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037
Further: when the fact remains that the assessee/petitioner is not even aware of any of those notices being sent to them, it is not known as to what the respondent-Department would achieve by sending notice after notice. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037 This renders service ineffective, breaching audi alteram partem (hear the other side).
In another case, notices under 'View Additional Notice/Orders' were deemed insufficient: Notice through On-line Portal, that too, not under the usual column, 'View Notice/Orders but under the different column, 'View Additional Notice/Orders cannot be deemed to be a sufficient service, as most of the assessees are not aware. TVL.Sri Balaji Traders vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 53291
Courts consistently prioritize actual knowledge. In a challenge to adjudication orders, the court held: service via the Common Portal is not sufficient for effective communication without acknowledgment. Limitation for appeals doesn't start without proper service. Bambino Agro Industries Ltd. vs State of Uttar Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 22078
Similarly: uploading of notices under the heading of ‘Additional Notices’ would not be sufficient service of notice in terms of Section 169 of the CGST Act. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. M/s ANANT WIRE INDUSTRIES vs SALES TAX OFFICER CLASS II/AVATO, WARD 83 & ANR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 32982
One ruling acknowledges portal upload as valid but urges alternatives: No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but... instead of sending repeated reminders, should have applied his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes. Tvl. Annai Earth Movers, rep. by its Proprietor, S.Rajasekar vs 1. The State Tax Officer (ST) Kodungaiyur Assessment Circle. 2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Kodungaiyur Assessment Circle. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 21160
RPAD (Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due) is often recommended as the best mode. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037Maa Gaytri Distributor VS State of Bihar - 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 85
In a registration cancellation case, the petitioner claimed unawareness of a portal-uploaded show cause notice, leading to directions for restoration upon compliance. Pawan Kumar Singh @ Sri Pawan Singh Son of Late Ganga Sagar Singh VS Union of India - 2025 Supreme(Gau) 218
These cases illustrate a trend: while Section 169 permits portal service, courts quash orders if awareness isn't established, often remanding for re-service via traditional means.
Portal service isn't always invalid:- Actual knowledge: If the recipient knew and responded, it may hold. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037- Supplemented service: Combined with email or post, it's stronger.- Deemed service arguments: Some rely on IT Act Section 2(k) for electronic dispatch upon upload, but courts reject 'deemed service' without proof of access. Bambino Agro Industries Ltd. vs State of Uttar Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 22078
Authorities must verify awareness before proceeding.
Proactive steps prevent disputes and uphold compliance.
Staying informed on service rules can safeguard your rights. For tailored advice, reach out to a GST expert. Judicial interpretations evolve, so monitor updates from reliable sources.
References:1. Tvl. Sri Balaji Traders rep. by its Proprietor N.Govindarajalu vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chidambaram -I - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9037: Core analysis on Section 169 and natural justice.2. Maa Gaytri Distributor VS State of Bihar - 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 85: Preference for RPAD.3. Bambino Agro Industries Ltd. vs State of Uttar Pradesh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 22078: Electronic service limitations.4. TVL.Sri Balaji Traders vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 53291, M/s ANANT WIRE INDUSTRIES vs SALES TAX OFFICER CLASS II/AVATO, WARD 83 & ANR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 32982, Tvl. Annai Earth Movers, rep. by its Proprietor, S.Rajasekar vs 1. The State Tax Officer (ST) Kodungaiyur Assessment Circle. 2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Kodungaiyur Assessment Circle. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 21160, Pawan Kumar Singh @ Sri Pawan Singh Son of Late Ganga Sagar Singh VS Union of India - 2025 Supreme(Gau) 218: Supporting precedents on portal inadequacies.
#GSTNoticeService, #TaxLawIndia, #CGSTAct
This Court expects the respondents to send notice vide a mode of service, which is sufficient as well as effective. ... In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to hold that the uploading of notices, orders and other communications, in terms of Section 169 (1)(d) of the GST Act, is a sufficient service. ... 4.8 The reason for non-inclusion of S.169(1)(c) & 169(1)(d) within deeming fiction of S. 169(2) is that the service of notice/orders in cases where service is effected by email or by #HL_....
The point for determination is whether uploading the impugned order in the GSTN portal alone is sufficient and whether the limitation for filing appeal under Section 107 of the Act would start running from the date of uploading. ... 12.What arises for determination in this case is not whether uploading of the order in the portal alone is sufficient?. ... But I can definitely hold that in the particular facts of a case, the author....
Relying on Section 2(k) of the Information Technology Act, it has been submitted, receipt of dispatch arises on the uploading of the show-cause notice or the order on the Common Portal. ... He further denies existence of any contract between the GSTN, and the petitioners as may allow for an interpretation to arise, that uploading of a notice and order on the Common Portal amounts to ‘deemed service’ of the notice or order, on the petitioner. ... No. 1114 of 2025, it h....
I am of the considered view that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not uploading signed audit report, form 10B because of software glitches. ... Thus, we are of the view that the assesse was prevented by sufficient cause for not uploading the audit report in Form 10B because of software glitches; therefore, we condone the delay in uploading the Form 10B and allow the claim of exemption under section 11 of the Act. ... This fact alone makes it clear that there were technica....
prescribed under Section 169 (1) instead of uploading the notices on the common portal again and again. ... Notice through On-line Portal, that too, not under the usual column, 'View Notice/Orders but under the different column, ''View Additional Notice/Orders cannot be deemed to be a sufficient service, as most of the assessees are not aware of the fact that the notices regarding assessment proceedings are ... are concerned, the same can no longer be deemed to be a ....
uploading the notices on the common portal again and again. ... Notice through On-line Portal, that too, not under the usual column, 'View Notice/Orders but under the different column, ''View Additional Notice/Orders cannot be deemed to be a sufficient service, as most of the assessees are not aware of the fact that the notices regarding assessment proceedings are ... are concerned, the same can no longer be deemed to be a sufficient service. ... The....
uploading the notices on the common portal again and again. ... Notice through On-line Portal, that too, not under the usual column, 'View Notice/Orders but under the different column, ''View Additional Notice/Orders cannot be deemed to be a sufficient service, as most of the assessees are not aware of the fact that the notices regarding assessment proceedings are ... are concerned, the same can no longer be deemed to be a sufficient service. ... The....
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 , uploading of a notice on the portal is sufficient compliance with regard to intimation to the taxpayer. 5. ... 9261/2024 dated 10th July, 2024] wherein it was held that uploading of notices under the heading of ‘Additional Notices’ would not be sufficient service of notice in terms of Section 169 of the CGST Act. The ld. ... It is the case of the Petitioner that the Show Cause Notice appears to have been up....
No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who finds no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices, instead of sending repeated reminders, should have applied his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes ... mode, can be deemed to be sufficient service. ... Further, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner the statutory notice that was uploaded in the GST Po....
It is submitted that under no circumstances can there be a direction to open portal in respect of one candidate alone. ... Further, it is contended that the NEET (UG) 2025 is conducted in thousand of centers across the Country and that the portal for uploading the application forms was closed on 07.03.2025 at 11.50 p.m. ... In the above factual circumstances, we are opinion that the prayer made seeking opening of the portal for uploading of the signature of the petitioner's daughter ca....
50 lakh. The assessee also raised a plea concerning the computation of the block period, whether it should be from the date of receipt of books of the accounts by the jurisdictional AO of the non-search person or the actual date of search in the case of the person against whom the search action has been initiated and accordingly the period of the “relevant assessment years” is to be calculated. (iv) On 3 April 2024, the petitioner uploaded a reply to the aforesaid notice under Section 153C of the Act. In the said reply, the petitioner stated that since the respondents have not opened the win....
2.1. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 05.09.2023 asking him to show cause as to why the registration certificate issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017 in his favour should not be cancelled due to non-furnishing of returns in terms of Section 39 of the CGST Act, 2017 for a continuous period of 6 [six] or more months. The petitioner was, thereby, directed to furnish his reply within a period of 30 [thirty] days from the date of service of the said show cause notice and was also asked to appear in person before the authority issuing the show cause noti....
Mere publication of notice of sale in newspapers alone is not sufficient. In the case on hand, notice for sale, fixed on 6/12/2016 is stated to have been served.
11. Clause 6(B)(v) of the said notice confers authority upon the notice inviting authority only to seek additional supporting documents “which are already submitted/uploaded in the web portal”. The said clause does not confer any right upon the bidders to produce fresh documents which were not uploaded in the web portal and as such this Court is unable to accept the argument of Mr. Mitra to the effect that in view of the said clause, the defect which has occasioned by not uploading the registered power of attorney is curable.
5. It is averred that vide notice dated September 26, 2016, the respondent extended the closing date for uploading the details of the admitted students on NCVTMIS web portal till September 30, 2016. The said order was made available for the first time only on September 27, 2016 by uploading the same on its official website. It is also averred that the respondent granted affiliation to the petitioner in its meeting held on September 16, 2016 for the academic session 2016-17.
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
