Facts
The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 18 February 2025 and its summary order in Form GST DRC-07, contending that notices uploaded to the GST portal had not come to his attention and that the assessment was made without a personal hearing.
Source reference: pp.1–2The respondents maintained that the notices had been uploaded but acknowledged that no personal hearing had been afforded.
Source reference: p.3The petitioner offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax, and the petition also sought removal of a bank attachment issued on 26 March 2026.
Source reference: pp.1, 3Issues
Whether the assessment order should be set aside and the matter remitted where portal-uploaded notices went unanswered and no personal hearing was provided.
Source reference: pp.2–4Whether the bank attachment should be lifted following the setting aside of the assessment order.
Source reference: pp.1, 5–6Law Applied
Section 169(1) of the GST Act recognises prescribed modes for serving notices and other communications; portal service is a valid mode, but where a taxpayer does not respond, the proper officer should consider using another prescribed mode—preferably registered post with acknowledgment due—to make service effective.
Source reference: p.4The judgment also applies the requirement of a meaningful opportunity of personal hearing before an adverse assessment is made.
Source reference: pp.2–3Reasoning
Although uploading the show-cause notice to the GST portal constituted a valid mode of service, the petitioner’s failure to respond warranted consideration of other available service modes rather than proceeding ex parte as a formality.
Source reference: pp.3–4The respondent also acknowledged that no personal hearing had been given.
Source reference: p.3In those circumstances, and in light of the petitioner’s offer to pay 25% of the disputed tax, the Court set aside the assessment and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.
Source reference: p.5Because the assessment order was set aside, the related bank attachment could not continue, subject to the conditions imposed by the Court.
Source reference: pp.5–6Holding
The petition was disposed of by setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter, conditional on the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks; the setting aside would take effect upon payment.
The petitioner was directed to file objections and supporting documents within three weeks of payment, after which the respondent must provide 14 days’ clear notice of a personal hearing and pass fresh orders on the merits.
Source reference: p.5The bank was directed to release the attachment and defreeze the account upon production of the Court’s order and proof of payment.
Source reference: pp.5–6No costs were awarded.
Source reference: p.6Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 20171
Original Court PDF
P SenthamaraikannanvsThe State Tax Officer
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
