Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Adjudication for Lack of Proper Service
Current GST Online · (2026) 9 CTOGST (Cal) 1023
Open tax-law Case Laws and Recent Decisions from a publishing tradition that began with Current Tax Reporter in 1972.
SIRSENDU HATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE & ORS.
The High Court considered a writ petition by Sirsendu Hati challenging the validity of a GST show-cause notice dated 21 September 2023 and an adjudication order of 18 December 2023 issued under Section 73 of the WBGST and CGST Acts. The petitioner argued that the notice was only uploaded under the portal’s “Additional Notice and Orders” tab, without separate intimation, preventing him from responding.
The State contended that opportunities had been afforded. However, the court found a prima facie violation of natural justice, as the petitioner had no actual notice until a recovery notice in March 2026. It quashed both the show-cause notice and the adjudication order.
The court directed the competent officer to issue a fresh show-cause notice within two weeks, allow the petitioner two weeks to file a comprehensive reply, and dispose of it by a reasoned, speaking order with personal hearing within twelve weeks.
This judgment emphasises that mere portal uploading does not suffice for service of statutory notices and reinforces the requirement of actual communication to safeguard natural justice under the GST regime.
Source & Citation
Case discussedSIRSENDU HATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE & ORS., HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA, Writ Petn. Appeal No. 15969 of 2026, decided 1st September, 2026
Current GST Online report(2026) 9 CTOGST (Cal) 1023
Sections consideredCGST Act, 2017, s. 73
ResultIn favour of : Assessee
Suggested citationSIRSENDU HATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE & ORS., (2026) 9 CTOGST (Cal) 1023