2025 (6) TMI 251 - HC - GST

Uploading GST Show-Cause Notice on Portal Invalidates Service, Violates Natural Justice Principles Under Section 169

M/s Binod Traders Versus The Union of India, The Secretary, The State of Bihar, The Commissioner of State Tax cum Secretary, The Additional Commissioner, The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, The Joint Commissioner, State Tax and The Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Siwan Circle, Siwan

M/s Binod Traders Versus The Union of India, The Secretary, The State of Bihar, The Commissioner of State Tax cum Secretary, The Additional Commissioner, ... 1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal questions considered by the Court are:Whether the mode of service of the show-cause notice by uploading it on the GST portal satisfies the requirements of valid service under Section 169 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax (BGST) Act, 2017;Whether the ex parte assessment order passed under Section 73(5) of the BGST Act, 2017 without granting an opportunity of hearing as mandated under Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017, violates the principles of natural justice;Whether the appellate authority was justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the merits, especially when the delay was caused due to failure in proper service of notice;Whether mere uploading of notices under the heading of 'Additional Notices and Orders' on the GST portal can be regarded as valid service of notice;Whether the impugned orders are liable to be quashed for non-compliance with statutory provisions regarding service and opportunity of hearing.2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISIssue 1: Validity of service of show-cause notice by uploading on GST portal under Section 169 of the BGST Act, 2017Relevant legal framework and precedents: Section 169 of the BGST Act, 2017 prescribes the modes of service of notices, including by hand delivery, registered post, or any other mode prescribed by the rules. The statute emphasizes proper communication to ensure the recipient is aware of the proceedings. Precedents from coordinate Benches have held that mere uploading of notices on the portal does not amount to valid service, especially when the recipient is not otherwise notified.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court concurred with the view that uploading the summary of the show-cause notice on the GST portal without any further communication or acknowledgment is insufficient to constitute valid service. The Court underscored that the statutory mandate requires service by registered post or other prescribed modes to ensure actual receipt.Key evidence and findings: The petitioner was not served with the show-cause notice by any mode other than uploading on the portal, and as a result, was unable to file a reply. This fact was crucial in determining the invalidity of the service.Application of law to facts: Since the petitioner did not receive the notice by a valid mode of service, the statutory requirement under Section 169 was not complied with, rendering the subsequent proceedings flawed.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent argued that uploading on the portal sufficed as service. The Court rejected this, relying on statutory interpretation and prior decisions emphasizing actual service.Conclusion: The Court held that uploading the notice on the GST portal alone does not satisfy the requirements of Section 169 and is not a valid mode of service.Issue 2: Violation of principles of natural justice due to ex parte assessment order passed without opportunity of hearing under Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017Relevant legal framework and precedents: Section 75(4) mandates that before passing an assessment order, the officer must provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The principles of natural justice require that no order be passed without affording a reasonable opportunity to be heard.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court observed that since the petitioner was not served with the show-cause notice properly, no opportunity of hearing was afforded. The ex parte order passed on 20.09.2023 was therefore in violation of Section 75(4) and principles of natural justice.Key evidence and findings: The absence of any hearing or reply from the petitioner before the assessment order was passed was established on record.Application of law to facts: The failure to provide hearing rendered the assessment order voidable and liable to be quashed.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent contended that the order was valid as per procedure. The Court rejected this, emphasizing statutory safeguards and fairness.Conclusion: The impugned ex parte assessment order is violative of natural justice and liable to be quashed.Issue 3: Dismissal of appeal by Appellate Authority on ground of delay without considering meritsRelevant legal framework and precedents: The appellate process under the BGST Act allows filing of appeals within prescribed time limits. However, when delay occurs due to non-receipt of valid notice, courts have recognized the need for leniency or condonation of delay.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court noted that the appeal was dismissed by a one-line, non-reasoned order on the ground of delay. Given that the delay was caused by failure in proper service of notice, the Court found the dismissal unjustified.Key evidence and findings: The petitioner was unable to file a timely appeal as the notice was not served validly, causing delay.Application of law to facts: The Court held that the appellate authority ought to have considered the merits and reasons for delay rather than dismissing summarily.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent maintained the appeal was barred by limitation. The Court prioritized fairness and procedural propriety.Conclusion: The appellate order dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay without reasons was set aside.Issue 4: Whether mere uploading of notices on GST portal can be valid serviceThis issue overlaps with Issue 1 but was addressed specifically. The Court reiterated that mere uploading under 'Additional Notices and Orders' on the portal does not meet statutory requirements for valid service under Section 169.Issue 5: Quashing of impugned orders for non-compliance with statutory provisionsGiven the findings on invalid service and denial of hearing, the Court held that the impugned orders dated 20.09.2023 (assessment order) and 08.05.2024 (appellate order) are liable to be set aside. The matter was remanded for fresh proceedings in accordance with law.3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Court held:'Uploading of show-cause notice in the GST portal alone does not constitute valid service under Section 169 of the BGST Act, 2017.''Passing of ex parte assessment order without granting an opportunity of hearing as mandated under Section 75(4)