Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/S D.R. Hotels Pvt. Ltd., a five-star hotel at Lucknow registered under GST, challenged an ex-parte assessment order dated 19.02.2025 passed under Section 73 of the GST Act for the period April 2020 to March 2021, along with a consequential order dated 11.06.2025 freezing its bank account. The petitioner's case was that all notices had been sent to the e-mail address and mobile number of a Manager who had since left the company, so it never received actual notice of the proceedings until its bank account was frozen — by which time the appellate limitation under Section 107 had already expired.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether service of GST notices at the e-mail address and mobile number provided at the time of registration constitutes valid service under Section 169, even where that address is no longer accessible to the taxpayer.
  2. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in these circumstances, or whether the petitioner should be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The e-mail address and mobile number on record belonged to a former Manager who had left the company, so the petitioner never actually received the notices or the final assessment order and could not respond or appeal in time.
  • Reliance was placed on Madras High Court rulings in Sakthi Steel Trading and Tvl. Sri Mathuru Eswarar Traders for the proposition that service through registered post should additionally have been attempted.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The petitioner had an equally efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 107, and the writ petition was not maintainable on this ground alone.
  • Section 169 lays down multiple modes of service, and once communication is sent to the e-mail address provided at registration, service is deemed complete on the date of tendering; it was the petitioner's duty to keep its registered contact details updated.

Court Order / Findings

  • Examining Section 169 of the GST Act in detail, the Court held that service can be effected at the discretion of the assessing authority through any of the prescribed modes, including e-mail to the address provided at registration, and is deemed served on the date of tendering.
  • The Court also invoked Section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 on deemed dispatch and receipt of electronic records, holding that since the petitioner had disclosed its e-mail and mobile number at registration, there existed an agreement for electronic communication, and a wrong or inaccessible e-mail address supplied by the assessee could not be held against the department.
  • Noting that notices were duly issued at each stage under Section 61 and Section 73, with no response or deposit from the petitioner despite repeated reminders, the Court held there was no violation of the principles of natural justice, and relying on Assistant Commissioner of State Tax vs. Commercial Steel Limited and CIT vs. Chhabil Dass Agarwal, held that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy.
  • The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable, with the petitioner relegated to the statutory appeal under Section 107, leaving the factual question of service to be examined by the appellate authority if raised.

Important Clarification

  • Service of a GST notice at the e-mail address and mobile number furnished by the taxpayer at the time of registration is valid service under Section 169(c), and it is the taxpayer's continuing obligation to keep such contact details updated with the department — an outdated address supplied by the assessee is generally not a ground to allege violation of natural justice against the department.
  • Where notice was sent through a mode expressly recognised under Section 169 and there is no independent violation of natural justice, courts will decline writ jurisdiction and relegate the assessee to the statutory appellate remedy, even where the practical result was an ex-parte order.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, CGST Act, 2017 – determination of tax not paid for reasons other than fraud, under which the ex-parte order was passed.
  • Section 169, CGST Act, 2017 – prescribes the modes of service of notices and orders, including service by e-mail to the registered address.
  • Section 13, Information Technology Act, 2000 – governs deemed time and place of dispatch and receipt of electronic records.

Decision – In Favour of

Dismissed in favour of the Department — the writ petition was held not maintainable, service on the registered e-mail address was upheld as valid, and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
  • Case No.: Writ Tax No. 575 of 2025
  • Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC-LKO:36334-DB
  • Coram: Hon'ble Alok Mathur, J. and Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.
  • Date of Order: 25 June 2025

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.