Madras HC Sets Aside Trader’s Ex Parte GST Assessment, Conditions Fresh Hearing On 25% Disputed-Tax Payment And Urges RPAD After Portal Notices Go Unanswered

In brief

The question

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.

The court held

The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, conditional on payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receipt of the order.

It also directed

Setting aside takes effect from the date of payment; any amount already recovered or deposited may be adjusted against the 25%.

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

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

The petition was disposed of without costs.

01Facts

The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 18 June 2026 and the consequential DRC-07 order under Section 73 of the GST Act.

¶ 1, 3–5, 7

The notices had been uploaded to the GST portal, but the petitioner said he was unaware of them and had not received the show-cause notice in original.

¶ 1, 3–5, 7

The respondent acknowledged that no personal hearing had been given.

¶ 1, 3–5, 7

The petitioner offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax in exchange for an opportunity to present his case.

¶ 1, 3–5, 7

02Issues

i.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.

¶ 3, 5, 7

ii.2. Whether remand should be conditional on the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax.

¶ 4–5, 10

03Law Applied

Section 169(1) of the GST Act provides for valid modes of service of notices and orders.

¶ 8–9

The Court observed that portal service is sufficient, but where a taxpayer does not respond to notices sent through that mode, the issuing officer should consider other modes permitted by Section 169, preferably registered post with acknowledgment due (RPAD), to achieve effective service.

¶ 8–9

The Court also applied principles of natural justice in considering the absence of a personal hearing; it cited no precedent.

Provisions in the judgment · 2

Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 73Section 169

04Reasoning

Although service by uploading notices to the GST portal is legally sufficient, the petitioner’s non-response should have prompted the officer to consider other available modes of service rather than proceed on the basis of portal uploads alone.

¶ 7–10

The assessment was confirmed without a personal hearing, and the respondent admitted that none had been provided.

¶ 7–10

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

¶ 7–10

05Holding

The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, conditional on payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks of receipt of the order.

¶ 10

Setting aside takes effect from the date of payment; any amount already recovered or deposited may be adjusted against the 25%.

¶ 10

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

¶ 10

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

¶ 10

The petition was disposed of without costs.

¶ 11

LawLens.Madras High Court

Original Court PDF