GST officers should pursue alternative Section 169 service when portal notices go unanswered.

The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 17 November 2025 under Section 73 of the GST Act for FY 2021–22.

It contended that notices had been uploaded to the GST portal under “View Additional Notices and Orders,” of which it was unaware, and that no personal hearing had been provided before the order was made.

The respondent acknowledged that no personal hearing had been afforded.

The petitioner offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax, and the respondent consented to remand on that condition.

1. Whether the assessment order should be set aside and the matter remitted where notices were uploaded to the GST portal but no personal hearing was provided

2. Whether remand could be made conditional on payment of 25% of the disputed tax, with consequential directions concerning any bank-account attachment

Section 169(1) of the GST Act recognises multiple modes of service, including service by post; portal service is a valid mode, but where a taxpayer does not respond to portal notices, the authority should consider other available modes—preferably RPAD—to make service effective.

The Court also applied the principles of natural justice in holding that an assessment should not be confirmed without affording the taxpayer a personal hearing in the circumstances of this case.

The challenged order was passed under Section 73 of the GST Act.

Although portal upload constituted a valid mode of service, the Court considered the petitioner’s asserted lack of awareness, the absence of any personal hearing, and the respondent’s admission that no hearing had been given.

It observed that, where portal notices received no response, the authority should have considered other modes of service under Section 169(1), rather than proceed solely on the basis of portal uploads.

In light of these circumstances and the petitioner’s offer to pay 25% of the disputed tax, the Court found remand appropriate.

The petitioner must file its reply and documents within three weeks of payment.

The respondent must then provide 14 clear days’ notice fixing a personal hearing and decide the matter afresh on its merits and in accordance with law.

Any bank attachment is to be lifted upon proof of payment; if the respondent does not communicate its lifting, the petitioner may present proof of payment and the order to the bank, which must defreeze the account.

The writ petition was disposed of without costs.