TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED
(i) Whether the adjudication order confirming tax, interest and penalty was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded where the show cause notice and reminder were uploaded on the GST portal's "Additional Notices Tab" (prior to portal changes), resulting in no effective notice, no reply, and no personal hearing.
(ii) What remedial directions were required to restore a fair opportunity of participation in adjudication, including timelines, costs, communication mode for hearing notice, and portal access.
(iii) Whether the Court should decide the validity of the challenged notifications extending time limits, or leave that issue open in view of pending consideration before the Supreme Court and a pending lead matter before this Court.
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS
Issue (i): Validity of ex parte adjudication where SCN/reminder were placed in "Additional Notices Tab" leading to absence of reply and hearing
Legal framework (as discussed by the Court): The Court applied the requirement that adjudication should not be concluded "in default" and that the noticee must get a fair opportunity to file a reply and be heard, consistent with principles of natural justice, as reflected in the Court's approach in similar matters.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Court found that the show cause notice (issued in September 2023) and reminder (issued in November 2023) were uploaded on the "Additional Notices Tab" on the GST portal at a time when that tab was not suitably visible (changes being made only after January 2024). On these facts, the Court accepted that the notices did not appear to have come to the petitioner's knowledge, leading to non-filing of reply and non-attendance at personal hearing, and consequently an ex parte adjudication with adverse demand. In such circumstances, the Court held that the petitioner did not receive a proper opportunity to be heard and therefore the matter warranted remand for adjudication afresh after participation.
Conclusion: The Court set aside the impugned adjudication order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority, specifically because the petitioner had no effective notice and consequently no meaningful opportunity to reply or be heard.
Issue (ii): Scope of remand and directions to ensure effective opportunity
Legal framework (as discussed by the Court): The Court proceeded on ensuring procedural fairness through a renewed opportunity to submit a reply and attend personal hearing, and requiring a "fresh reasoned order".
Interpretation and reasoning: To cure the defect of ineffective portal communication and absence of hearing, the Court prescribed a structured opportunity: (a) time to file reply to the show cause notice; (b) a condition of costs; (c) an obligation on the adjudicating authority to issue a personal hearing notice and communicate it through specified electronic means; (d) a requirement to consider the reply and hearing submissions and pass a reasoned order; and (e) ensuring portal access so the reply and documents can be accessed and uploaded.
Conclusion: The Court granted time up to 31 January 2026 to file the reply, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by 10 January 2026; directed that after the reply, a personal hearing notice be issued and communicated to the petitioner via the stated e-mail and mobile contact; directed a fresh reasoned order after considering submissions; and directed that GST portal access be provided within one week to enable uploading and access to notices/documents.
Issue (iii): Adjudication of the validity of the challenged notifications
Legal framework (as discussed by the Court): The Court noted that the validity of the relevant notifications was under consideration before the Supreme Court, and that certain matters concerning parallel State notifications were being considered in a separate lead matter before this Court.
Interpretation and reasoning: Given the pending consideration of the notification-validity questions at higher and coordinate levels, and because the present case could be disposed of on the narrower ground of lack of effective opportunity to respond and be heard, the Court declined to finally decide the notification challenge in this petition.
Conclusion: The Court expressly left open the issue of validity of the impugned notifications. It further directed that any fresh adjudication order would remain subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings concerning the relevant notification issues and the pending lead matter before this Court, while keeping all rights and remedies of the parties open.
TaxTMI 
