Uploading a GST show-cause notice only under “Additional Notices and Orders” violates natural justice.

The petitioner challenged the adjudication order dated 22 December 2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under Section 73 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

A show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 22 September 2023, demanding tax, interest and penalty, was uploaded only under the GST portal tab titled “Additional Notice and Orders”.

The petitioner contended that it received no separate or effective intimation of the notice and consequently could not submit a reply.

It claimed to have discovered the notice and adjudication order only in May 2026, after its new accountant examined the portal.

The State respondents opposed the petition, arguing that the petitioner had been granted adequate opportunities to defend itself.

Whether uploading the show-cause notice only under the GST portal tab “Additional Notice and Orders,” without separate effective intimation, violated the principles of natural justice.

Whether the adjudication order dated 22 December 2023 passed under Section 73 of the WBGST Act and CGST Act should be quashed for failure to provide the petitioner a meaningful opportunity to respond.

The Court applied Section 73 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which governs adjudication of tax not paid, short-paid or erroneously refunded, together with the foundational principles of natural justice, particularly the requirement of reasonable notice and a meaningful opportunity of hearing before an adverse adjudication.

The Court held that mere technical uploading of a show-cause notice in a portal section that did not effectively communicate the proceeding to the taxpayer could not satisfy procedural fairness where the taxpayer thereby remained unable to respond.

The Court found that the petitioner had established a prima facie case because the show-cause notice was placed only under the “Additional Notice and Orders” tab and no separate intimation was provided.

Although the State argued that sufficient opportunities had been granted, the Court focused on the practical absence of effective notice and the resulting inability of the petitioner to file a reply.

Since the adjudication order had been passed without the petitioner receiving a meaningful opportunity to contest the demand, the proceedings were held to be contrary to natural justice.

The Court therefore considered interference necessary in the interests of justice.

The respondent authority was directed to issue a fresh show-cause notice within two weeks.

The petitioner was directed to file a comprehensive reply within two weeks thereafter.

The authority was further directed to consider the reply, afford the petitioner a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned and speaking order within twelve weeks from receipt of the reply, with communication of the decision within one week thereafter.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.