TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in M/s D.R. Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Gomti Nagar Lucknow Thru. Finance Director Mr. Amitabh Porwar Versus Deputy Commissioner, Sector 20 State GST Lucknow - 2025 (7) TMI 202 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT held that when notices are served through the e-mail address provided at the time of registration, service is deemed to be effected under Section 169, and writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked without exhausting the appellate remedy under Section 107.
Facts:
D.R. Hotels Pvt. Ltd. ('the Petitioner') is a registered five-star hotel in Lucknow. The Deputy Commissioner, State Tax ('the Respondent') issued notices under Sections 61 and 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021, based on discrepancies in returns. These notices were sent via e-mail and mobile number provided at the time of GST registration, which belonged to the Petitioner’s former Manager.
The Petitioner contended that due to the Manager’s departure and lack of access to the registered e-mail and mobile number, it remained unaware of the assessment proceedings and therefore could not respond or file an appeal within limitation. The Petitioner became aware of the assessment only upon freezing of its bank account under an order dated June 11, 2025. It approached the High Court, challenging the assessment order dated February 19, 2025 and the freezing order.
The Respondent argued that notices were validly served as per the modes prescribed under Section 169 of the CGST Act and the Petitioner had not updated its contact details. The Petitioner had an efficacious alternate remedy under Section 107 and hence the writ petition was not maintainable.
Issues:
- Whether service of notice through e-mail ID provided at the time of registration satisfies the requirements of Section 169 of the CGST Act?
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite availability of alternate statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act?
Held:
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in M/s D.R. Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Gomti Nagar Lucknow Thru. Finance Director Mr. Amitabh Porwar Versus Deputy Commissioner, Sector 20 State GST Lucknow - 2025 (7) TMI 202 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURTheld as under:
- Observed that, Section 169 of the CGST Act permits service of notice through various modes, including e-mail, and the impugned order records that notices were sent to the registered e-mail ID and mobile number of the Petitioner as per GST records.
- Held that, once service is effected through a valid mode prescribed under Section 169, such service is deemed to be complete as per law.
- Noted that, as per Section 13(2) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, an electronic record is deemed to be received when it enters the designated computer resource.
- Held that, since notices were duly sent to the registered e-mail address, there was no violation of principles of natural justice, and the Petitioner’s failure to update contact details cannot invalidate the proceedings.
- Held further that, the Petitioner had an efficacious remedy under Section 107 by filing an appeal, and there were no exceptional circumstances (such as breach of fundamental rights or violation of natural justice) warranting interference under Article 226.
(Author can be reached at [email protected])