V.S.Muruganandam Vs Deputy State Tax Officer -II (Madras High Court)
The writ petition challenged the assessment order dated 05.02.2025 passed by the first respondent and the consequential rejection of appeal dated 08.04.2025 by the second respondent. The petitioner contended that all notices and communications were uploaded on the GST common portal and, as he was unaware of such notices, he failed to file a reply within the stipulated time. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner’s appeal was later rejected on the ground of delay.
The petitioner submitted that he is now willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount and sought an opportunity to present his case. The respondents stated that notices were uploaded on the GST portal and admitted that no personal hearing was provided prior to passing the impugned order. They requested remand subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax.
The Court observed that although uploading notices on the portal constitutes valid service, when there is no response from the taxpayer, the officer should explore other modes of service prescribed under Section 169 of the GST Act, such as RPAD, to ensure effective service. Merely passing an ex parte order after fulfilling procedural formalities would not serve any useful purpose and may lead to unnecessary litigation.
