GST Portal Notices, No Personal Hearing: Madras HC Sets Aside GST Assessment, Conditions Fresh Hearing On 25% Of Disputed Tax

In brief

The question

Whether the assessment order should be set aside where notices were uploaded on the GST portal, the taxpayer did not respond, and no personal hearing was provided.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition by setting aside the assessment order dated 22 April 2024 and the consequential recovery notice dated 26 August 2025, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

It also directed

The petitioner must pay 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receiving the order; setting aside takes effect upon payment.

Any amount already recovered or deposited may be adjusted against that payment.

The petitioner must file objections and supporting documents within three weeks after payment.

The respondent must then provide 14 clear days’ notice fixing a personal hearing and pass a fresh order on the merits and in accordance with law.

No costs were ordered.

01Facts

The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 22 April 2024 and a consequential recovery notice dated 26 August 2025.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 1–5

She stated that notices had been uploaded to the GST portal, but she was unaware of them and therefore did not respond.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 1–5

The assessment was made without a personal hearing.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 1–5

The petitioner offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax, and the respondents consented to remand subject to that payment.

pp. 2–3 · ¶ 1–5

02Issues

i.Whether the assessment order should be set aside where notices were uploaded on the GST portal, the taxpayer did not respond, and no personal hearing was provided.

p. 4 · ¶ 7–9

ii.Whether remand for fresh consideration could be conditioned on payment of 25% of the disputed tax.

p. 3, 5 · ¶ 4–5, 10

03Law Applied

Section 169(1) of the GST Act recognises prescribed modes of service, including service through the GST portal and other modes.

p. 4 · ¶ 8–9

The Court observed that where a taxpayer does not respond to portal notices, the officer should explore other available modes—preferably registered post with acknowledgement due—to make service effective, rather than treating portal upload alone as an empty formality.

p. 4 · ¶ 8–9

The Court also treated the absence of a personal hearing as a relevant procedural deficiency warranting reconsideration.

p. 4 · ¶ 8–9

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 169

04Reasoning

Although portal upload is a valid mode of service, the Court considered that the petitioner had not responded to the notices and that the assessment was passed without a personal hearing.

pp. 4–5 · ¶ 7–10

In those circumstances, the officer should have considered other modes of service under Section 169(1), rather than proceeding ex parte.

pp. 4–5 · ¶ 7–10

Given the petitioner’s offer to pay 25% of the disputed tax and the respondents’ consent to remand on that condition, the Court set aside the assessment and recovery notice subject to payment.

pp. 4–5 · ¶ 7–10

05Holding

The Court allowed the petition by setting aside the assessment order dated 22 April 2024 and the consequential recovery notice dated 26 August 2025, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10(i)–(iii)

The petitioner must pay 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receiving the order; setting aside takes effect upon payment.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10(i)–(iii)

Any amount already recovered or deposited may be adjusted against that payment.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10(i)–(iii)

The petitioner must file objections and supporting documents within three weeks after payment.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10(i)–(iii)

The respondent must then provide 14 clear days’ notice fixing a personal hearing and pass a fresh order on the merits and in accordance with law.

pp. 5–6 · ¶ 10(i)–(iii)

No costs were ordered.

p. 6 · ¶ 11

LawLens.Madras High Court