Uploading a GST show-cause notice only under “Additional Notice and Orders” without separate intimation violates natural justice.

The petitioner challenged an adjudication order dated 3 January 2022 and an appellate order dated 27 August 2024, by which his appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (WBGST Act) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) was dismissed as time-barred

The petitioner alleged that the show-cause notice dated 11 January 2021 had been uploaded only under the GST portal’s “Additional Notice and Orders” tab, without separate intimation, and that he learned of the adjudication order only in June 2024

The State opposed the petition, submitting that the petitioner had been given ample opportunity and that the appeal was correctly dismissed on limitation

1. Whether the appeal’s dismissal on limitation warranted interference where the petitioner alleged that the show-cause notice had not been separately brought to his attention.

2. Whether the adjudication and appellate orders should be set aside and the matter reconsidered on its merits.

The Court considered Section 107 of the WBGST Act and the CGST Act, which governs appeals under those enactments.

It applied the principle of natural justice that a person must receive fair notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond before an adverse adjudication; the Court treated uploading the notice only under the “Additional Notice and Orders” tab, without separate intimation, as a violation of that principle in the circumstances of this case.

The Court found that the petitioner had made a prima facie case and accepted that the manner in which the show-cause notice was uploaded, without separate intimation, had prevented him from replying and violated natural justice.

Because the appellate authority had dismissed the appeal solely on limitation rather than deciding its merits, the Court considered intervention warranted in the circumstances.

It therefore directed a fresh adjudication after considering the grounds raised in the appeal and giving the petitioner a hearing.

It directed respondent no. 3 to consider the petitioner’s appellate grounds on their merits, afford him a hearing, and issue a reasoned fresh adjudication order within 12 weeks, with communication to the petitioner within a further week.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.