Case Law Details
Nikhil Debnath Vs Union of India & other (Tripura High Court)
Mere Uploading of GST Order on Portal Without Valid Service Under Section 169 Cannot Sustain Recovery Proceedings
The petitioner is a developer. A show cause notice proposing demand of GST was issued. It replied. It appeared. All correspondence was being undertaken physically under acknowledgment. However; order was simply uploaded on the portal. The petitioner became aware of such order only upon filing application under Right to Information (RTI) Act. Challenging such order, petition came to be filed.
The Hon’ble Tripura High Court admitted the petition and granted stay of recovery proceedings. It noted: (i) the Madras High Court in Sharp case has held that mere uploading of order on portal is not “valid” service under section 169 of the CGST Act and the Revenue has to follow other modes mentioned therein; (ii) as regards plea of sending it by Speed Post, what subclause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 169 of the Act requires is that the order should be sent by Speed Post with “Acknowledgement due”. Though the department has produced the Dispatch Register; they have not produced the “Acknowledgment” card which would have been returned after the article sent by speed post is received by the petitioner; (iii) notes that the Postal Department has informed the petitioner that there is no evidence of service of the article in question on petitioner after it was dispatched.
Argued by Adv. Bharat Raichandani i/b UBR Legal
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TRIPURA HIGH COURT
Admit the Writ Petition.
Perused the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.
Admit the Writ Petition. Perused the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.
There is a plea raised in para-23 of the counter affidavit of respondent Nos. 1 , 3 & 4 that not only was the order in original uploaded in the common portal on 08.06.2023 but the same was also dispatched by Speed Post on 01.06.2023 to the address provided by the petitioner in the GST registration.
As regards the former, the judgment of the Madras High Court in Sharp Tanks and Structurals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals), Tirunelveli reported in (2025) 34 CENTEX 426 (Madras), referred to in the previous interim order states that mere uploading of the order in the GST Portal would not suffice, and that the respondents ought to choose other modes of service also, which would be a proper exercise of the power of the respondents when there are other choices also made available under Section 169 of the Act.
As regards the plea of sending it by Speed Post, what subclause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 169 of the Act requires is that the order in original should be sent by Speed Post with “Acknowledgement due”.
Though the respondents have produced the Dispatch Register and a photocopy of the receipt issued by the Postal Department showing dispatch by Speed Post, they have not produced the “Acknowledgment” card which would have been returned to the respondent after the article sent by speed post is received by the petitioner with signature of petitioner’s representative.
Therefore, prima facie it cannot be said that there is compliance of sub-clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 169 of the CGST Act.
Counsel for the petitioner also points out that the Postal Department has informed the petitioner that there is no evidence of service of the article in question on petitioner after it was dispatched by the respondents.
The said response of the Department of Posts, Government of India dt. 07.04.2026 is also taken on record
Therefore, the interim order granted on 17.12.2025 is made absolute.
List for hearing in due course.
Author Bio
