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

The petitioner challenged an adjudication order dated 1 February 2022 and an appellate order dated 6 February 2025, by which its appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was dismissed as time-barred.

The petitioner contended that the show-cause notice dated 25 October 2021 had been uploaded only under the GST portal’s “Additional Notice and Orders” tab, without separate intimation, and that it learned of the adjudication order after changing its accountant.

It also stated that recovery proceedings were proposed during the pendency of the writ petition.

The State opposed the petition, submitting that the petitioner had been given adequate opportunities to defend itself.

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

2. Whether, in the circumstances, the Court should interfere with the appellate order dismissing the appeal solely on limitation and the underlying adjudication proceedings.

The Court considered Section 107 of the WBGST Act and the CGST Act, under which the petitioner had pursued its statutory appeal.

It applied the principle of natural justice that a person must receive a fair opportunity to respond to a show-cause notice before an adverse decision is made; the Court found a violation where the notice had only been uploaded under the specified portal tab and no separate intimation had been given.

No judicial precedent is cited in the judgment.

The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case because the show-cause notice was placed under the “Additional Notice and Orders” tab without separate intimation, leaving the petitioner unable to respond.

It treated this as a breach of natural justice and considered that the appeal had been dismissed only on limitation, without examination of the merits. In light of those circumstances, it held that interference was warranted in the interests of justice.

It directed the first respondent to issue a fresh show-cause notice within two weeks; the petitioner must file a detailed reply within two weeks thereafter. The respondent must provide a hearing, pass a reasoned order within 12 weeks, and communicate that decision within a further week.

The petition was disposed of accordingly.