Case Title: Tvl. Sonaa Enterprises v. Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Hosur North-II Circle
Court: High Court of Judicature at Madras
Petition No.: W.P. No. 20225 of 2025 (with W.M.P. Nos. 22805 & 22806 of 2025)
Date of Judgment: 09.06.2025
Category: Assessment / Natural Justice / Notice Service
Relevant Sections: Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017 (Modes of Service of Notice)
Facts (Paras 3–5)
The petitioner, Tvl. Sonaa Enterprises, challenged an assessment order dated 27.04.2024, alleging violation of natural justice. The Deputy State Tax Officer uploaded all notices and communications solely in the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab of the GST common portal. The petitioner contended that it was unaware of these notices and hence could not respond within time, leading to an ex parte order. During the hearing, the petitioner expressed willingness to deposit 25% of the disputed tax to seek a fresh opportunity of hearing.
Questions Before the Court
-
Whether uploading of notices only on the GST portal, without any alternative mode of service, constitutes valid service under Section 169 of the CGST Act?
-
Whether the assessment order passed without personal hearing can be sustained in law?
Observations (Paras 7–9)
The Court noted that although uploading on the portal is a valid form of service under Section 169, the purpose of communication is defeated if the taxpayer remains unaware of the notice. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy emphasized that when repeated reminders receive no response, the Proper Officer must apply mind and attempt other prescribed modes—such as Registered Post (RPAD) or email—to ensure effective service. Passing ex parte orders without genuine service merely satisfies “empty formalities” and burdens appellate and judicial fora.
The Court held that there was a clear lack of opportunity for personal hearing and inadequate service of notice, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.
Judgment (Paras 10–11)
The High Court quashed the assessment order dated 27.04.2024 and remanded the case for fresh consideration with specific conditions:
-
The petitioner shall pay 25% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks from receipt of the order.
-
Upon payment, the petitioner may file a detailed reply with supporting documents within three weeks.
-
The respondent shall issue 14 days’ clear notice for personal hearing and pass a reasoned order thereafter, in accordance with law.
The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Summary of Cases Referred
| Case | Issue | Verdict / Ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Tvl. Sonaa Enterprises v. Deputy State Tax Officer-2 (Madras HC, 09.06.2025) | Service of GST notice only through portal | Uploading on portal alone insufficient if taxpayer unaware; other service modes under Section 169 must be explored to uphold natural justice. |
Between Fine Lines
This decision reinforces that mere portal upload is not sufficient service under GST unless it achieves actual communication. Officers must ensure effective notice delivery, failing which orders risk being struck down as ex parte. Businesses should regularly monitor the GST portal but can seek relief if they prove non-communication and violation of fair hearing principles.
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.”
