What Constitutes Valid Service Of Notice U/S 169 Of CGST Act? Madras High Court Clarifies

The Bench of Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed that “when the Statute had also mandated issuance of notice in person/ registered post/ e-mail, etc., the Rules cannot be limited to only serving it through electronic modes.”

In this case, the assessee/petitioner alleged that the department/respondents had uploaded only the notices/ orders in the web portal and not by any other modes as prescribed under Section 169 of the GST Act.

The assessee submitted that even though the provisions under Section 169 (1) (a) to (f) are disjunctive, they should be read conjunctively, failing which, the basic principles of natural justice would be violated. They would all submit that Clauses (a) to (c) of sub section (1) of Section 169 should be read as alternative.

The department submitted that service of notice through portal had already been held to be a valid service. When the assesses have obligated to visit the portal, it is their duty to also look at the notices that had been issued through the portal and reply properly.

The bench looked into the case of Pandidorai Sethupathi Raja Vs Superintendent of Central Tax, Chennai [W.P.Nos.14879] where it was held that it is the obligation of the assessee to visit the portal and therefore, posting of summons and orders through portal is a sufficient compliance of notice on the assessee and therefore, there is no necessity for any alert.

The bench noted that the Courts have not dealt with Section 169 of the GST Act in its entirety before coming to the conclusion that posting in portal itself is a sufficient compliance.

Regarding the argument of the department that Rules 149 of the GST Rules only provides for electronically issuing of notices/ summons/ orders, the bench opined that the Rules are creature of a Statute and the Rules cannot circumscribe the mode that had been provided under the Statute. When the Statute had also mandated issuance of notice in person/ registered post/ e-mail, etc., the Rules cannot be limited to only serving it through electronic modes. Therefore, the contention that the Rules will prevail over the Statute cannot be accepted.

The bench held that “Section 169 mandates a notice in person or by registered post or to the registered e-mail ID alternatively and on a failure or impracticability of adopting any of the aforesaid modes, then the State can, in addition, make a publication of such notices/ summons/ orders in the portal/ newspaper through the concerned officials.”

In view of the above, the bench allowed the petition and set aside the assessment orders.

Case Title: Udumalpet Sarvodaya Sangham v. The Authority

Case Number: W.P.(MD)Nos.26481

Counsel for Petitioner/ Assessee: M. Iniyavan

Counsel for Respondent/ Department: R. Suresh Kumar and J.K. Jeyaseelan

Click Here To Read/Download The Order