Tax authorities must pursue alternative Section 169 service modes before passing ex parte orders.

The petitioner challenged the respondent’s assessment order dated 9 December 2025 and consequential FORM GST DRC-07 order for FY 2021–22.

The notices had been uploaded to the GST portal, but the petitioner said it was unaware of them and had not submitted a reply.

The respondent acknowledged that no personal hearing had been provided before the order was passed.

The petitioner also submitted that it had paid the disputed tax and sought a fresh opportunity to present its case.

The Court noted that the show-cause notice had been uploaded to the portal and that the assessment order confirmed its proposals without a personal hearing.

1. Whether the assessment order should be set aside and the matter remitted where the notices were uploaded to the GST portal, but no personal hearing was provided before the order was passed.

2. Whether, after receiving no response to portal notices, the tax officer should explore other modes of service available under Section 169(1) of the GST Act.

Section 169(1) of the GST Act recognises prescribed modes of service, including service by uploading a notice to the common portal.

The Court accepted that portal upload is a sufficient mode of service, but held that where the taxpayer does not respond to notices, the officer should consider other available modes—preferably registered post with acknowledgment due (RPAD)—to achieve effective service rather than merely fulfil formalities.

The judgment also proceeded on the basis that the absence of a personal hearing before the impugned order warranted remitting the matter for a fresh hearing.

Although the show-cause notice had been uploaded to the GST portal, the petitioner claimed it had not become aware of the notice, and the respondent conceded that no personal hearing had been afforded.

The Court considered that repeated non-response should have prompted the officer to explore other modes of service under Section 169(1), rather than proceed to an ex parte assessment.

It further took account of the petitioner’s submission that the disputed tax had been paid and concluded that the matter should be reconsidered after hearing the petitioner.

The petitioner was directed to file its reply and supporting documents within three weeks of receiving the order.

Upon receipt, the respondent must issue 14 days’ clear notice fixing a personal hearing, consider the petitioner’s submissions, and pass a fresh order on the merits and in accordance with law.

The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.