Adjudication Order Passed Ex Parte Due to SCN Uploaded Solely Under Additional Notices Violates Natural Justice

By | November 10, 2026
0 Comment
Adjudication Order Passed Ex Parte Due to SCN Uploaded Solely Under Additional Notices Violates Natural Justice
Issue
  • Whether passing an ex parte adjudication order based on a Show Cause Notice (Form DRC-01) uploaded solely under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab on the GST portal without separate intimation violates principles of natural justice and warrants quashing of the assessment order.
Facts
  • Issuance of SCN: The petitioner, a registered GST assessee, was issued a Show Cause Notice (SCN) in Form DRC-01 dated 31.12.2023 under Section 73 of the CGST/WBGST Act.
  • Portal Upload Defect: The SCN was uploaded exclusively under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab on the GST portal without any separate intimation sent to the petitioner.
  • Ex Parte Adjudication: Owing to the absence of separate intimation, the petitioner remained unaware of the notice and failed to file a response.
  • Adjudication & Recovery: The Proper Officer passed an ex parte adjudication order on 26.04.2024, subsequently followed by a recovery notice dated 14.08.2026.
  • Writ Challenge: The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the SCN, adjudication order, and recovery proceedings on the ground of natural justice violation.
Decision
  • Violation of Natural Justice: Decided in favour of the assessee/matter remanded. Uploading an SCN strictly under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab without separate intimation prevented the assessee from filing a reply, thereby breaching natural justice principles.
  • Quashing of Orders: Decided in favour of the assessee/matter remanded. The SCN dated 31.12.2023, the ex parte adjudication order dated 26.04.2024, and the recovery notice dated 14.08.2026 were quashed.
  • Remand for De Novo Adjudication: Decided in favour of the assessee/matter remanded. Liberty was granted to the tax authorities to issue a fresh notice, provide an adequate opportunity to file a reply, grant a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a stipulated timeframe.
Key Takeaways
  • Effective Mode of Portal Service: Merely hosting notices deep within sub-menu tabs like ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ without explicit alerts or separate intimations does not constitute proper service if it deprives the taxpayer of an opportunity to defend.
  • Mandate of Natural Justice: Ex parte adjudication orders passed without ensuring effective notice to the assessee violate principles of natural justice and are liable to be set aside by writ courts.
  • Procedural Safeguard on Remand: When quashing orders passed due to improper service of notices, courts routinely grant revenue authorities liberty to re-initiate proceedings afresh from the stage of issuing proper show cause notices.
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Sharma Transport Agency
v.
Deputy Commissioner, State Tax
Smita Das De, J.
WPA No. 16438 of 2026
SEPTEMBER  24, 2026
Sandip Choraria, Akash Chakraborty and R. Manna for the Petitioner. Vipul Kundalia, Nilnjan Bhattacharya, Vikramarth S. Chand, Prithu Dudhoria and Sunil Kumar Singhania for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record.
2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging inter alia, the legality and validity of the adjudication order dated 26.04.2024 passed by the respondent No. 1 under Section 73 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act(hereinafter referred to as the said ‘WBGST Act’) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(hereinafter referred to as the said ‘CGST Act’)
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as follows;
i. That a show cause notice in Form DRC 01 No. ZD191223072222P dated 31.12.2023 has been issued to the petitioner demanding tax, interest and penalty.
ii. That said notice has been uploaded on the GST portal under the tab ‘Additional Notice and Orders’. Due to this, the petitioner did not get any actual intimation and hence could not respond to the show cause notice.
iii. That the petitioner came to know about the adjudication order dated 26.04.2024 only when its new accountant discovered the show cause notice and order from the additional tab in May 2026.
iv. That the entire proceedings and the impugned order are contrary to law and have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without due compliance with the procedure prescribed under the said Act.
v. That upon discovery of the show cause notice and order, the petitioner approached this Court challenging the ex parte proceeding.
vi. That during pendency of the writ petition, recovery notice in Form GST 13 dated 14.08.2026 has been issued by the respondent no. 1 on the petitioner’s principal/employer directing it to pay the petitioner’s receivable to the Government exchequer.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted since the petitioners have been granted ample opportunities to defend his case, the adjudication order has been rightly passed.
5. Having heard the parties and upon perusing the records made available this Court observes as follows;
i. The petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case.
ii. The fact that show cause notice has been only uploaded under the ‘tab Additional Notice and Orders’ and no separate intimation has been given therefore, the petitioner has been unable to reply to the same. This constitutes a violation of natural justice.
6. Considering the peculiar facts of the case, interference by this Court is warranted in ends of justice.
7. In view of the above this Court directs as follows:
a. The show cause notice dated 31.12.2023, the adjudication order dated 26.04.2024 and recovery notice dated 14.08.2026 are hereby quashed and set aside.
b. Respondent no. 1 is directed to issue a fresh show cause notice on the petitioners within a period of two weeks. The petitioner shall respond the same by filing a comprehensive and detailed reply within two weeks thereafter before the respondent no. 1. The respondent no. 1 shall consider and dispose of the reply filed by the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the reply in accordance with law upon affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners.
c. Such decision shall be communicated to the petitioners within a week thereafter.
8. With the above observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.
9. Since no affidavit in opposition has been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied and not admitted.