Facts
The petitioner challenged an adjudication order dated 26 December 2025, issued in Form GST DRC-07 for FY 2021–22.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 3–5It contended that notices uploaded under the GST portal’s “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab had gone unnoticed and that the order was made without a personal hearing.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 3–5The respondents accepted that no personal hearing had been provided and agreed to remand subject to the petitioner paying ₹25,000 towards the disputed tax.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 3–5Issues
Whether the adjudication order should be set aside where the petitioner received no personal hearing and said it had not become aware of notices uploaded on the GST portal
Source reference: pp. 3–4, paras. 7–9Whether remand should be conditional on payment of ₹25,000 towards the disputed tax
Source reference: pp. 3, 5, paras. 4–5, 10Law Applied
Section 169 of the GST Act provides for service of notices and other documents through specified modes, including electronic service.
Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 8–9The Court accepted that uploading a notice on the GST portal constitutes a valid mode of service; however, where the taxpayer does not respond, the officer should consider other available modes under Section 169—preferably registered post with acknowledgment due (RPAD)—to make service effective.
Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 8–9The Court also applied the requirement of a meaningful opportunity of personal hearing before adjudication.
Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 8–9Reasoning
Although portal service was legally sufficient, the petitioner’s non-response called for the officer to consider other modes of service under Section 169.
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 7–9The Court found a lack of effort to ensure effective service and noted that the adjudication order had been passed without a personal hearing.
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 7–9In light of those circumstances and the petitioner’s undertaking to pay ₹25,000, the Court considered remand appropriate, subject to that payment.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10Holding
The Court set aside the adjudication order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, conditional on the petitioner paying ₹25,000 within four weeks of receiving the order; the setting aside takes effect upon payment.
The petitioner must file its reply and supporting documents within three weeks of payment.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10On receiving the reply, the respondents must provide 14 days’ clear notice fixing a personal hearing and then pass fresh orders on the merits and in accordance with law.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 11Acts & 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
M/S. A.G BABU SAHvsThe Commissioner of State Tax / Commercial Taxes
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
