Case Summary
Case Title: Tvl. Priya Safety Wears v. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST) & Anr.
Court: Madras High Court
Petition Number: W.P. No.17086 of 2025 with W.M.P. No.19374 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 22.07.2025
Category of Dispute: Violation of principles of natural justice – Service of notice under GST
Relevant Provisions: Section 169 of CGST Act, 2017
Facts (Para 2–3)
The petitioner, Tvl. Priya Safety Wears, challenged an assessment order dated 08.02.2024 for FY 2018-19, contending that the show cause notice was uploaded only on the GST portal without serving a physical copy. The petitioner became aware of the order belatedly and filed an appeal with a delay of 269 days. It was also argued that no opportunity of personal hearing was given, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit 25% of the disputed tax if the matter was remanded.
Questions in Dispute
Whether uploading a show cause notice only on the GST portal, without exploring alternative service methods under Section 169, constitutes effective service and whether the ex parte order passed without personal hearing is valid.
Observations (Para 5–7)
The Court acknowledged that while service by uploading on the portal is technically valid, officers must apply their mind if the taxpayer does not respond. Section 169(1) prescribes multiple valid service modes (such as RPAD). Limiting service only to portal upload, without considering other methods, reduces it to a mere formality and undermines natural justice. The Court held that such practice leads to avoidable litigation and wastage of administrative and judicial time.
Judgment (Para 7–8)
The High Court set aside the impugned assessment order dated 08.02.2024 and remanded the matter to the assessing officer with the following directions:
-
Petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed tax within 4 weeks.
-
Petitioner to file reply with documents within 2 weeks thereafter.
-
Authority to provide at least 14 days’ notice and an opportunity of personal hearing before passing fresh orders.
The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.
Table of Cases Referred
(This judgment did not refer to external case law, only statutory interpretation of Section 169 CGST Act. Hence, no external precedents cited.)
Between Fine Lines
For businesses, this judgment emphasizes that GST notices uploaded only on the portal may not be enough if taxpayers do not respond. Tax officers are expected to use alternative modes like RPAD under Section 169 to ensure effective communication. For trade, it means that ex parte assessment orders can be challenged where genuine non-receipt of notices can be established.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”