Uploading a GST show-cause notice only under “Additional Notices” violates natural justice absent separate intimation.

The petitioner challenged an adjudication order dated 17 April 2023 and an appellate order dated 30 August 2024 under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The appellate authority had dismissed the petitioner’s appeal as time-barred without considering its merits.

The petitioner submitted that he learned of the adjudication order only after checking the common portal in July 2026, and that the show-cause notice had been uploaded under the “Additional Notice and Orders” tab without separate intimation, leaving him unable to respond.

The State opposed the petition, contending that the petitioner had received ample opportunities to defend his case.

Whether the appellate order dismissing the petitioner’s appeal solely on limitation should be set aside and the appeal reconsidered on its merits.

Whether uploading the show-cause notice only under the “Additional Notice and Orders” tab, without separate intimation, deprived the petitioner of an opportunity to respond and violated natural justice.

Section 107 of the WBGST Act and the CGST Act provides the statutory framework for appeals against adjudication orders.

The Court also applied the principle of natural justice that a person must have a meaningful opportunity to respond to a show-cause notice before an adverse adjudication; it treated the absence of separate intimation, in the circumstances, as a violation of that principle.

The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case and accepted that the show-cause notice had been uploaded only under the specified portal tab, without separate intimation, preventing the petitioner from replying.

Because the appeal had been rejected solely on limitation and not examined on its merits, the Court considered intervention warranted in the interests of justice.

It therefore directed the appellate authority to reconsider the grounds of appeal on their merits, with an opportunity of hearing, rather than leaving the limitation-based dismissal in place.

The writ petition was disposed of.

The Court noted that, as no affidavit in opposition had been called for, the writ petition’s allegations were deemed denied and not admitted.