Adjudication Order Set Aside Due to SCN Upload in ‘Additional Notices Tab’

Case Name: R H A Enterprises v. Union of India & Ors.
Court: High Court of Delhi
Petition Number: W.P.(C) 6560/2025, CM APPLs. 29759/2025 & 29760/2025
Category: Natural Justice – Ex-parte Order – Opportunity of Hearing
Date of Judgement: 16th May, 2025
Relevant Sections: Section 73, Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017
Challenge Type: Demand Order and Validity of Notification No. 56/2023 – Central and State Tax

Facts of the Case:

(Para 2, 3, 7)

• The Petitioner challenged the demand order dated 21.03.2024 and Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax and State Tax under Article 226.
• The show cause notice (SCN) dated 24.12.2023 was uploaded only under the “Additional Notices Tab” on the GST portal.
• The Petitioner claimed lack of knowledge of the SCN, which resulted in the absence of reply and denial of a personal hearing, leading to an ex-parte order.

Questions in Consideration:

(Para 3, 4, 5, 7, 13)

1. Whether Notification No. 56/2023 issued without prior recommendation of the GST Council under Section 168A is valid?
2. Whether the ex-parte demand order dated 21.03.2024, passed without communication of SCN and without affording a hearing, is sustainable?
3. Whether such procedural lapse amounts to violation of principles of natural justice?

Observations of the Court:

(Para 5–11)

• The Court noted that the validity of Notification No. 56/2023 is pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and shall be subject to that final decision.
• Multiple High Courts have taken varying views on Notification 56/2023; hence Delhi High Court refrained from adjudicating on its validity.
• It observed that SCN uploaded only under “Additional Notices Tab” without actual notice or personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.
• Referring to Neelgiri Machinery and Satish Chand Mittal cases, the Court emphasized that denial of hearing on such technical grounds is not sustainable.
• Post January 2024, changes were made to the portal to avoid such lapses, but the SCN in this case pre-dates that.

Judgement of the Court:

(Para 9–14)

• The demand order dated 21.03.2024 was set aside.
• The Adjudicating Authority was directed to provide a fresh opportunity to the Petitioner to submit a reply by 10.07.2025.
• A personal hearing must be granted and notice of the same shall be communicated via email and phone.
• The issue of Notification validity remains open and subject to final decision of the Supreme Court and parallel proceedings in Engineers India case.
• All other rights and remedies were kept open and access to GST portal was directed to be provided to the Petitioner.

Between Fine Lines

• If a Show Cause Notice is uploaded only under the “Additional Notices Tab” without effective communication, it can be treated as non-service.
• Ex-parte orders passed without hearing are liable to be set aside.
• Courts are inclined to ensure parties are given a fair hearing before adverse orders.
• The validity of Notification 56/2023 is sub-judice before the Supreme Court, so parallel challenges are on hold.
• Portal changes from Jan 2024 fix previous technical issues but cannot justify denial of hearing in earlier cases.

Summary of Referred Cases

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.”