Service of Notice by Making It Available on GST Portal Is Sufficient | HC

Case Details: T.K Navas. v. Commissioner of Goods and Service Taxes - [2025] 175 taxmann.com 612 (Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Ziad Rahman A.A., J.
• Moosa E.S., Adv. for the Petitioner.
• P.R. Sreejith, Adv. (SC) & Smt. Arun Ajay Shankar, Adv. (G.P) for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenging an order passed under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was issued without proper service of notice. Although the notice was uploaded on the GST portal, the petitioner argued that it was not served through any of the methods specified under clauses (a), (b), or (c) of Section 169(1) of the Act. Based on this, the petitioner alleged that there was a violation of the principles of natural justice, and that the order was liable to be set aside.

High Court Held

The High Court observed that Section 169(1)(d) of the CGST/SGST Act clearly provides that making a notice available on the common portal constitutes valid service. The Court further relied on a precedent—Sunil Kumar K v. State Tax Officer-I, Kottarakkara [2024] 165 taxmann.com 657 (Kerala), where a Division Bench had held that service of notice through the portal is sufficient for the purposes of initiating or continuing proceedings under the Act.

Therefore, the Court held that there was no violation of principles of natural justice and that the service of notice in the present case was legally sufficient. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed, though the Court clarified that this would not prejudice the petitioner’s right to pursue any other statutory remedy available under the law.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Sunil Kumar K vs. State Tax Officer-I, Kottarakkara [2024] 165 taxmann.com 657 (Kerala) (Para 3) followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Sunil Kumar K v. State Tax Officer [2024] 165 taxmann.com 657 (Kerala) (para 3).