HC Sets Aside Ex-Parte GST Demand Despite SCN Being Portal-Visible Post-January 2024:

Court remands GST adjudication, grants fresh hearing opportunity with costs, and keeps Section 168A notification challenge open pending SC ruling
HC Remands Ex-Parte GST Order, Grants Fresh Hearing Despite Portal Visibility of SCN

HC Sets Aside Ex-Parte GST Demand Despite SCN Being Portal-Visible Post-January 2024
The petitioner, Globe Overseas Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order passed by the Sales Tax Officer for Financial Year 2019-20, raising a GST demand of Rs. 12,30,763. The petitioner also challenged the show cause notice and multiple notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act extending limitation periods.
The petitioner contended that the show cause notice and the reminder notice were uploaded on the “Additional Notices” tab of the GST portal and did not come to its knowledge. Thus, no reply was filed, and no personal hearing was attended, resulting in an ex-parte adjudication order.
Issue Before Court: Whether an ex-parte GST adjudication order should be sustained when no reply to the show cause notice was filed and no effective opportunity of personal hearing was afforded, and whether the challenge to Section 168A notifications should be adjudicated while the issue is pending before the Supreme Court.
HC's Decision: The Hon'ble High Court held that although the petitioner’s contention regarding non-visibility of notices on the GST portal was untenable, the fact remained that no reply to the show cause notice had been filed and the adjudication order was passed without effectively hearing the petitioner. The Court held that the matter deserved to be remanded to allow the petitioner to contest the demand on merits.
Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000 to the Delhi High Court Bar Association. The petitioner was granted time till 31.01.2026 to file a reply to the show cause notice. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to issue a personal hearing notice through the petitioner’s specified mobile number and email address and, thereafter, pass a fresh reasoned order.
The Court clarified that the challenge to the impugned notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act was left open and any fresh order passed would remain subject to the outcome of proceedings pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and before the High Court in W.P.(C) 9214/2024.
To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below
About Author

Meetu Kumari
Content Manager
Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2166My Recent Articles
- ITAT Condones 648-Day Delay After Assessee Lost Family During COVID, Restores AppealPremium
- ITAT Quashes Rs 2 Crore Penalty as Time-Barred; Limitation Starts from AO’s Reference, Not Show-Cause NoticePremium
- ITAT Remands Appeal After Finding NFAC Ignored 89 Pages of Evidence on Cash Deposits and Flat Improvement CostPremium
- ITAT Grants Fresh Opportunity in Rs 2.63 Crore Foreign Bank Credit Addition CasePremium
- ITAT Deletes Section 68 Addition on Explained Demonetisation Cash DepositsPremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








