Effective Notice: set aside ex parte orders when portal uploads fail to bring notices to addressee; remand for fresh adjudication.

Failure of effective notice via portal uploads under an 'Additional Notices' tab was held to vitiate ex parte adjudication: where notices were not demonstrably brought to the addressee, prior HC precedent and the Court's reasoning required setting aside impugned orders and remanding for fresh adjudication. For remedy and to secure natural justice, the petitioner was granted a fixed period to file replies and a right to personal hearing; authorities were directed to communicate hearing notices by registered mobile and e-mail, provide portal access, consider submissions, and pass fresh orders.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether impugned orders passed ex parte as a consequence of notices/SCNs being uploaded only under the 'Additional Notices' tab on the GST portal, which did not effectively bring the SCNs to the notice of the petitioner, required setting aside and remand for fresh adjudication; (ii) Whether the petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to file replies and for personal hearings with effective communication safeguards.

Issue (i): Whether lack of effective notice caused by uploading SCNs under the 'Additional Notices' tab warrants setting aside the impugned orders and remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The petitions concern SCNs dated 23 September 2023 and 28 May 2024 which, as pleaded, were uploaded under the 'Additional Notices' tab and were not effectively brought to the petitioner s attention, resulting in non-filing of replies and ex parte orders. Prior decisions of this Court on similar facts have treated portal-only uploads under that tab as not constituting effective communication where access was not demonstrably available, and have set aside orders to permit adjudication on merits. The factual distinction between notices dated before and after the portal changes was considered but the overarching concern is that adjudication proceeded on the basis of non-filing owing to alleged deficient communication.

Conclusion: The impugned orders are set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication on the ground of lack of effective notice arising from the mode of portal upload.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file replies and be heard by personal hearing with specified safeguards for communication.

Analysis: The petitions by the same petitioner raise a common grievance regarding portal-based intimation. To ensure adjudication on merits and to meet requirements of fair opportunity and natural justice, specific procedural safeguards were directed: a time period for filing replies, issuance of personal hearing notices, and communication of those notices via registered mobile number and e-mail, together with access to the GST portal to enable uploading of replies and access to notices and documents.

Conclusion: The petitioner is granted four weeks to file replies; the Adjudicating Authority shall issue and communicate personal hearing notices by registered mobile and e-mail, allow portal access, consider the replies and hearing submissions, and pass fresh orders.

Final Conclusion: The relief sought to set aside the impugned ex parte orders and to secure an opportunity to be heard has been granted by setting aside the orders and remanding the matters for fresh adjudication with specified communication safeguards.

Ratio Decidendi: Where statutory notices are uploaded on a portal in a manner that does not effectively bring them to the notice of the addressee, resulting in non-filing of replies and ex parte adjudication, the appropriate remedy is to set aside the impugned orders and remand for fresh adjudication after affording an effective opportunity to file replies and be heard.

---