Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Tvl Sri Mahalakshmi Blue Metal, represented by its partner C. Selvaraj Pandi and holding GSTIN 33BOGPS2535K1ZR, challenged an assessment order dated 12.02.2025 for the year 2020-21. The petitioner submitted that all notices and communications were uploaded only on the GST common portal, and since its accountant was unaware of them, no reply could be filed within time, resulting in an ex-parte order without any opportunity of personal hearing.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether service of notice by uploading solely on the GST common portal, without exploring other statutorily prescribed modes, constitutes effective service when the assessee does not respond.
  2. Whether the resultant ex-parte assessment order, passed without personal hearing, deserves to be set aside.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • All notices and communications were uploaded on the GST portal, of which the petitioner's accountant remained unaware, resulting in failure to file a reply in time.
  • The petitioner was willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to secure an opportunity to present its case.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The department had uploaded the notices on the GST Online Portal, but the petitioner failed to avail the opportunity; the Additional Government Pleader fairly admitted that no personal hearing was granted prior to the impugned order, and did not oppose remand subject to 25% pre-deposit.

Court Order / Findings

  • Justice Krishnan Ramasamy held that while uploading a notice on the portal is a sufficient mode of service in law, an officer who receives no response despite repeated reminders ought to apply his mind and explore other modes of service prescribed under Section 169 of the GST Act, such as RPAD, rather than mechanically passing an ex-parte order.
  • Merely fulfilling "empty formalities" of portal service does not serve any useful purpose and only breeds multiplicity of litigation, wasting the time of the officer, the appellate authority/tribunal and the Court.
  • The impugned order dated 12.02.2025 was set aside and the matter remanded, subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks; the petitioner was directed to file its reply, and the respondent to grant a 14-day clear notice for personal hearing before passing fresh orders on merits.

Important Clarification

  • Where a taxpayer does not respond to notices served exclusively through the GST portal, tax officers are expected — as good administrative practice under Section 169(1) — to explore additional modes of service such as RPAD before proceeding ex-parte, failing which the resultant order risks being set aside for lack of effective service.

Sections Involved

  • Section 169, Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — modes of service of notice, decision, order, summons or communication.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions, in part in favour of the Assessee — assessment order set aside subject to 25% pre-deposit and a fresh opportunity of hearing.

Case Details

Court: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No.: W.P.(MD)No.35672 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.28276 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Date of Order: 12.12.2025

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.