Delhi High Court: SCN Uploaded to GST Portal's 'Additional Notices' Tab (Pre-Redesign) Not Valid Service if Unreceived

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling, has set aside an order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, holding that a Show Cause Notice (SCN) uploaded to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) portal under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' category, prior to the portal's redesign, does not constitute sufficient service if the assessee claims non-receipt. The bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma , emphasized the importance of proper notice service for ensuring principles of natural justice.

The decision came in the case of M/s ANANT WIRE INDUSTRIES v. SALES TAX OFFICER CLASS II/AVATO, WARD 83 & ANR. (W.P.(C) 17867/2024), where the petitioner challenged an order dated 21st February 2024, arguing it stemmed from an SCN dated 5th September 2023, which they never received.

Case Overview

M/s Anant Wire Industries (the Petitioner) contended that the crucial SCN was uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notices and Orders' tab, a section they argued was not easily accessible or regularly checked. Consequently, they were unaware of the SCN and could not respond, leading to the adverse order. The Petitioner filed an affidavit dated 19th December 2024, affirming that the SCN and the subsequent order were not received either on their registered email ID or physically.

Arguments and Legal Precedents

The petitioner's counsel, Mr. Pulkit Verma and Mr. Akhil Gupta, argued that the benefit of non-service should be granted, relying on established precedents from the Delhi High Court. They cited:

Kamla Vohra v. Sales Tax Officer Class II [W.P. (C) No. 9261/2024 dated 10th July, 2024]: This Division Bench judgment held that uploading notices under 'Additional Notices' was not sufficient service under Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.

ACE Cardiopathy Solutions (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [W.P. (C) No. 6758/2024 dated 10th May, 2024]: This case also supported the petitioner's stance.

The court noted that in these previous cases, relief was granted to petitioners upon filing an affidavit confirming non-receipt of the notice on their registered email ID.

Court's Reasoning and Key Excerpts

The High Court meticulously examined the precedents. It highlighted a key passage from the Kamla Vohra judgment, which itself referenced ACE Cardiopathy Solutions :

> "3. The impugned SCN was uploaded on the portal in the category of ‘Additional Notices’ which the petitioner claims was not easily accessible. It is contended that the show cause notices were required to be placed under the heading of ‘Notices’ but the same was not done. > ... > 5. In the said decision, this Court had rejected the contention that uploading of the notices under the heading ‘Additional Notices’ would besufficient service in terms of Section 169 of the CGST Act. The relevant extract of the said decision is set out below :- > “4. Learned counsel for respondent submits that in terms of Section 169 of 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. We are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel, reference may be had to the judgment of the High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 26457/2023, titled M/s East Coast Constructions and Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) dated 11-9-2023, wherein the High Court of Madras has noticed that communications are placed under the heading of “View Notices and Orders” and “View Additional Notices and Orders”. The Madras High Court had directed the respondents to address the issue arising out of posting of information under two separate headings. As per the petitioner, the Menu “View Additional Notices and Orders” were under the heading of“ UserServices ”and not under the heading “View Notices and Orders”. > 6. The GST Authorities had addressed the issue and had re-designed the portal to ensure that ‘View Notices’ tab and ‘View Additional Notices’ tab were placed under one heading. The impugned SCN was issued before the portal was re-designed.”"

After perusing the petitioner's affidavit confirming non-receipt, the Delhi High Court found that M/s Anant Wire Industries deserved an opportunity to reply to the SCN, consistent with its earlier decisions.

Final Decision and Implications

The Delhi High Court delivered its order on December 23, 2024, setting aside the impugned order dated 21st February 2024. The key directives from the Court are:

1. Remand for Fresh Consideration: The matter is remanded back to the concerned Sales Tax Department.
2. Opportunity to Reply: The Petitioner, M/s Anant Wire Industries , is granted 30 days to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 5th September 2023.
3. Hearing to be Afforded: A hearing must be provided to the Petitioner.
4. Timeframe for New Order: A fresh order is to be passed within three months from the date of the hearing.

This judgment reiterates the critical importance of ensuring that taxpayers are properly served with notices. It particularly highlights the deficiencies in the earlier design of the GST portal where notices placed under 'Additional Notices and Orders' could be easily missed, leading to violations of natural justice. The ruling provides relief to taxpayers who may have been adversely affected due to such procedural lapses before the GST portal was redesigned to consolidate notice viewing.