Portal-Only GST Notices: Madras HC Says Officers Should Try Other Modes After No Reply, Orders Fresh Hearing In Milk Shop’s Case On 10% Deposit

The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 24 December 2025, contending that notices uploaded to the GST portal had not come to her attention and that the assessment was made without a personal hearing.

The respondent stated that the notices had been uploaded to the portal, acknowledged that no personal hearing was provided, and did not oppose remand subject to payment of 10% of the disputed tax.

The petitioner offered to make that payment.

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

Although portal service is sufficient, where a taxpayer does not respond to notices sent through that mode, the officer should consider using another available mode—preferably registered post with acknowledgment due (RPAD)—to make service effective.

The Court also applied the requirement of a meaningful opportunity to be heard before an adverse assessment is made.

The Court accepted that portal service was legally sufficient, but considered the petitioner’s non-response and the absence of a personal hearing alongside the officer’s failure to explore other modes of service under Section 169(1).

It reasoned that relying on portal uploads alone, despite no response, risked reducing service to an empty formality and generating further litigation.

In light of the respondent’s acknowledgment that no personal hearing had been given and the petitioner’s offer to pay 10% of the disputed tax, the Court found remand appropriate.

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

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

The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.