The article examines the evolving legal position on service of notices under the GST regime compared to the earlier Excise, Service Tax, and VAT framework. Under the pre-GST regime, service of notices, orders, and summons required actual delivery through registered post, speed post, courier with proof of delivery, or personal service, and the department had to establish proper service. Mere dispatch was not treated as valid service. With GST, Section 169 of the CGST Act introduced electronic modes of service, including email and uploading notices on the GST portal. However, disputes have arisen where taxpayers failed to notice orders or notices uploaded only on the portal, resulting in ex parte orders and missed appeal deadlines. Several High Courts have held that mere uploading on the GST portal may not constitute effective communication for limitation purposes and emphasized principles of natural justice. The issue has reached the Supreme Court, which has stayed a key High Court ruling, leaving the final legal position on portal-based service of notices unsettled.
A) Service of Notice under Excise/ Service tax / Vat regime:
The law under Excise / Service tax / Vat regime any notice / order / summon regarding the service of the was crystal clear that service of these documents same was completed on receipt of such document by the person whom it was intended to be delivered and proof of delivery needs to be retained by the department. The section 37 (c) of Central Excise Act ,1944 is reproduced which was applicable both for excise and service tax notices read with Central Excise Ac 1944 and Chapiter Finance Act 1944.
Section 37C.Service of decisions, orders, summons, etc. –
(1) Any decision or order passed or any summons or notices issued under this Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be served, –
(a) by tendering the decision, order, summons or notice, or sending it by registered post with acknowledgment due 2[or by speed post with proof of delivery or by courier approved by the Central Board of Excise and Customs constituted under the Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 (54 of 1963)] to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised agent, if any;
(b) if the decision, order, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clause (a), by affixing a copy thereof to some conspicuous part of the factory or warehouse or other place of business or usual place of residence of the person for whom such decision, order, summons or notice, as the case maybe, is intended;
(c) if the decision, order, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clauses (a) and (b), by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the officer or authority who or which passed such decision or order or issued such summons or notice.
(2) Every decision or order passed or any summons or notice issued under this Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which the decision, order, summons or notice is tendered or delivered by post 3[or courier referred to in s
The statutory hierarchy for service typically followed this sequence:
By sending it by registered post with acknowledgment due or by speed post or by courier with proof of delivery or by preparing it to be served by an officer.
In case, it cannot be served as above, by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the office or the factory/place of business.
The manual receipt by authorized signatory of the organization of was also construed to be proper servicing of these notices / order.
B) Jurisprudence Pre GST regime:
The Supreme Court and High Court in various cases affirmed the following Proposition of law ;
Mere Dispatch of notice is not service of notice.
The Revenue has to prove that notice was served to notice either manual receipt taken or POD record maintained in each case. Service of notice / orders/ were not recognized which delivered on emails / whats app mode or any digital. Even today also for Pre- GST cases, this golden rule applies
C) In GST regime game there is major changes in law:
Section 169 – Service of notice in certain circumstances.
(1) Any decision, order, summons, notice or other communication under this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be served by any one of the following methods, namely: –
(a) by giving or tendering it directly or by a messenger including a courier to the addressee or the taxable person or to his manager or authorised representative or an advocate or a tax practitioner holding authority to appear in the proceedings on behalf of the taxable person or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business, or to any adult member of family residing with the taxable person; or
(b) by registered post or speed post or courier with acknowledgement due, to the person for whom it is intended or his authorised representative, if any, at his last known place of business or residence; or
(c) by sending a communication to his e-mail address provided at the time of registration or as amended from time to time; or
(d) by making it available on the common portal; or
(e) by publication in a newspaper circulating in the locality in which the taxable person or the person to whom it is issued is last known to have resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain; or
(f) if none of the modes aforesaid is practicable, by affixing it in some conspicuous place at his last known place of business or residence and if such mode is not practicable for any reason, then by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of the office of the concerned officer or authority who or which passed such decision or order or issued such summons or notice.
(2) Every decision, order, summons, notice or any communication shall be deemed to have been served on the date on which it is tendered or published or a copy thereof is affixed in the manner provided in sub-section (1).
(3) When such decision, order, summons, notice or any communication is sent by registered post or speed post, it shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee at the expiry of the period normally taken by such post in transit unless the contrary is proved.
D) Present Disputes in GST regime of notices issued on portal:
The is a see changes after introduction of GST law since 2017 and nation is moving toward compete digitization of the tax laws. This was a smart move by the government which had resulted in doubling revenue collection since June 2017 by way of curbing malpractices, tax evasion and better compliances. But these changes proved to be beneficial for the government in achieving growth in revenue and to customers by way of reduced taxes. Even after reduction in taxes in September 2025 in a major reform in rate rationalization has not resulted in any major downfall of revenue. The magic of GST has worked for nation.
But there is a burdensome for the business for compliance. In a growing economy which has witnessed rapid digitization in last 5 years, there is a issue for the small and medium business to cope up with the pace of changes happened in GST laws.
One of the issues is that department started issued notice /order under section 169 (D) on common portal which some time remain un noticed by the assesee because of adoption of this new changes. The small and medium enterprises do not have dedicated staff and rather depended on filing of returns on consultants who handle lot of files. There is a need to check daily/ weekly on portal that any notice /order has been issued. In the process many assesee even large business players missed to check the notices /order in time resulting in time barred replies and appeals.
E) Present Position:
A) The various High Court intervene in the matter to provide natural justice to these affected petitioners in various matters as under:
1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS in the matter of Alagappan Palaniappan Proprietor Vetri Medicals 16-C, New Avadi Road, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.Vs the Deputy State Tax Officer Kilpauk Assessment Circle No.1 6th Floor, PAPJM (Annexure) Building, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006. It was held by Hon’ble High Court that:
Mere Uploading GST notice on Portal Repeatedly without Ensuring Receipt by Taxpayer Cannot be Considered as Effective Service. In this case, issue came to light when the petitioner’s banker, Central Bank of India, informed him in March 2025 that his current account had been frozen due to the assessment order. It was contended that he had not received any show cause notice, and the order had been uploaded only on the GST portal without any personal intimation or delivery through recognized modes.
2. 2025-VIL-1353-ALH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD M/s M/s BAMBINO AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD and others vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH “- HELD – The service of notices and orders through electronic mode, including uploading on the Common Portal, is permissible under the law. However, the deeming fiction of ‘deemed service’ under Section 169(2) and (3) of the CGST Act applies only to service through modes specified in Clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f) of Section 169(1), and not to service through electronic mode under Clauses (c) and (d) – The GST laws have undergone a transformative change from the earlier offline/physical mode of service to an electronic mode. This has caused difficulties small and medium-sized assessees who were accustomed to the earlier physical mode of service and communication. The legislature has consciously used the term ‘communicated’ in Section 107 for the purpose of start of limitation to file appeals, which requires actual or constructive service of the contents of the notice or order, and not merely ‘receipt’ of the electronic communication. The legislature has deliberately not used the word ‘upload’ and its derivatives but the phrase ‘making it available’. Thereby the legislative intent has been clearly expressed that the document or communication should be readily available to the noticee – In the absence of any verifiable mechanism with the GSTN or revenue authorities to ascertain when the notices or orders were retrieved, downloaded or viewed by the assessees on the Common Portal, the date of ‘communication’ for the purpose of Section 107 would be governed by actual or constructive service strictly in terms of Section 169 of the Act – In the absence of any legislative intent, uploading of notices/orders on the Common Portal cannot be equated with the modes of ‘tendering’, ‘publishing’ or ‘affixation’ under Section 169(2) and (3) for the purpose of deemed service – The individual adjudication orders are set aside subject to the petitioners depositing 10% of the disputed demand of tax and matters are remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration after providing the petitioners with copies of the show cause notices and documents and an opportunity of hearing – The writ petitions are allowed”
This a very detailed judgment which through light on word constructive receipt of notice to be provided to provide natural justice to the assessee.
3. HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA in the matter of Sri Nikhil Debnath Vs union of India held that mere uploading of notice would not suffice and respondent ought to follow other methods also. The Hon’ble High Court followed judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court.
4. Sunil Batra Vs The state of West Bengal (Calcutta High Court) WPA 28042 of 2025 Order Dated: Jun 11, 2026, writ filed by Sunil Batra, challenged the legality of an order dated October 9, 2025, passed under Section 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act. The petitioner contended that the adjudicating authority had confirmed a demand based on an SCN issued in Form DRC-01 dated December 24, 2023. However, the petitioner was unaware of this notice and the subsequent adjudication order dated March 12, 2024, until a newly appointed accountant discovered them on the GST portal.
5. 2026 (5) TMI 1428 – GSTAT NEW DELHI in the matter of A & T SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL TAX DELHI WEST & ORS
Alternative modes of service – Portal service – Speed post – Effect of service of notice of the appeal, through the portal and email as well as by registered post or speed post – HELD THAT:- In view of the absence of response to service through the portal and email, the Tribunal directed that service on the respondents be effected additionally through registered post/speed post in terms of Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017, on the appellant filing the paper book and duly stamped envelopes, and listed the matter for hearing
B) The issue has been stayed by Hon’ble Supreme Court:
2026-VIL-53-SC, STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR Vs M/s BAMBINO AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD & ANR.
GST – Mode and manner of service of notices/orders – Vide the impugned order the High Court held that uploading of notices/orders on the Common Portal cannot be equated with the modes of ‘tendering’, ‘publishing’ or ‘affixation’ under Section 169(2) and (3) for the purpose of deemed service and the date of ‘communication’ for the purpose of limitation Section 107 would be governed by actual or constructive service – SC HELD – Issue Notice. There shall be stay of the impugned order till the next date of hearing – Ordered accordingly Way forward:
The issue is arguable in nature and shall be finally decided by the Supreme Court ultimately because at present there is no option on the portal to generate receipt on viewing the notice to prove that department notice has been seen but there is a system of generation of mail to registered l id that there is a generation of notice on portal.
F.Way forward:
The present controversy will deny law of natural Justice to Hon’ble tax payer in providing opportunity to defend his case. The GST council should consider this issue sympathetically to provide an opportunity in replying / filing these time barred notice/ appeals on payment of additional fees for regularizing these matters. The Government could establish GSTAT since implantation of law since 2017 merely took 8 years. Any delay / negligence on viewing notices on portal should not be permanent cost of tax, interest and penalty which may be equal to tax amount. The tax payer should be given a fair chance of learning this tax.
This will save the time of various High Courts also as there is no alternative remedy then to approach Jurisdictional High Courts. There are lot of cases pending on this issue. The section should be amended to provide a hard Copy of the order through registered post also particularly all appealable orders.
Author Bio
