Madras HC Says Officers Should Try Other Service Modes After Unanswered GST Portal Notices, Setting Aside Assessment For Hearing If Firm Pays 25% Of Disputed Tax

The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 16 June 2026 concerning alleged discrepancies in exempted turnover reported in its GST returns.

The petitioner said it had not seen notices uploaded to the GST portal and therefore had not replied; the respondent acknowledged that no personal hearing was given before the assessment order was passed.

The petitioner offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax and sought an opportunity to present its case

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

The Court stated that portal service is sufficient, but where the taxpayer does not respond to notices sent through that mode, the officer should consider other modes prescribed by Section 169(1), preferably registered post with acknowledgement due (RPAD), to make service effective

The Court also treated the absence of a personal hearing as a procedural deficiency warranting remittal in the circumstances of this case

Although the show-cause notice had been uploaded to the GST portal, the petitioner said it was unaware of the notice, and the respondent admitted that no personal hearing had been afforded.

The Court considered that, when portal notices receive no response, the officer should explore other statutory service modes rather than proceed solely on the basis of portal service.

In these circumstances, and given the petitioner’s willingness to pay 25% of the disputed tax, the Court found it appropriate to set aside the assessment and remit the matter for fresh consideration on conditions

The petitioner must file its reply and supporting documents within three weeks after payment. The respondent must then issue 14 days’ clear notice fixing a personal hearing, consider the petitioner’s response, and pass a fresh order on the merits and in accordance with law

No costs were ordered