Service of GST notices via inaccessible portal tab led to denial of hearing and quashing of rectification rejection, matter remitted.

Challenge to electronic service of tax notices uploaded under an inaccessible portal tab raises that the taxpayer was deprived of audi alteram partem and hence the ex parte assessment order passed under Section 73 is vitiated; consequence: the impugned rectification rejection must be quashed. It is further emphasised that orders must record reasons showing application of mind, failure of which causes prejudice; consequence: the matter is remitted for fresh consideration. The authority is directed to reconsider the rectification application, examine portal records and supporting documents, and pass a reasoned order including any rectification permissible under Section 161.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether uploading notices/orders in the web-portal under the category "Additional Notices/Orders" constitutes valid service under Section 169 of the GST Act; (ii) Whether the rejection of the rectification application under Section 161 and the ex parte assessment order under Section 73 are vitiated for want of opportunity of hearing and for being non-speaking/arbitrary.

Issue (i): Whether service effected by uploading notices/orders under "Additional Notices/Orders" on the GST portal is valid service under Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The portal placement of communications under the "Additional Notices/Orders" category was not prominent or easily accessible, resulting in non-receipt of notice by the taxpayer and consequent non-participation in proceedings. Precedent from multiple High Courts demonstrates that where portal architecture or placement prevents a taxpayer from reasonably discovering notices, such uploading does not satisfy the statutory modes of service for purposes of enabling participation in quasi-judicial proceedings. The factual matrix shows inability to access the specific tab and resultant prejudice to the taxpayer's right to be heard.

Conclusion: Service by uploading notices/orders solely under the "Additional Notices/Orders" tab, where such placement is not reasonably accessible to the taxpayer, does not constitute valid service under Section 169 of the GST Act and vitiates subsequent proceedings dependent on such service.

Issue (ii): Whether the order rejecting the rectification application under Section 161 and the ex parte order under Section 73 are liable to be quashed for lack of opportunity of hearing and absence of reasons.

Analysis: The rectification provision in Section 161 permits correction of errors apparent on the face of record, and where records/documents uploaded on the portal could have been examined, the authority ought to have considered them before rejecting rectification. The rejection order is laconic and does not disclose consideration of the material relied upon in the rectification application. Principles requiring a reasoned order and audi alteram partem protection apply to quasi-judicial tax proceedings; non-speaking orders and absence of opportunity to explain facts and figures cause prejudice and indicate arbitrariness.

Conclusion: The rejection of the rectification application and the ex parte assessment order are quashed for want of a fair opportunity to be heard and for being non-speaking/arbitrary; the matter is remanded for fresh, reasoned consideration in accordance with Sections 161 and 73 of the GST Act.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders are set aside on the stated factual grounds and the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication, with directions to afford the taxpayer a prompt and effective opportunity to be heard and for the authority to pass a reasoned order after considering available portal records and submissions.

Ratio Decidendi: Where electronic service via a departmental portal places notices in a section that is not reasonably accessible or prominent to the taxpayer, such uploading does not effect valid service for purposes of quasi-judicial proceedings under the GST Act; consequent orders passed without affording a fair opportunity to be heard or without recording reasons are liable to be quashed and remitted for fresh, reasoned disposal.

---