Bombay High Court Sets Aside ₹62.42 Lakh GST Demand Over Notices Uploaded In Wrong Portal Section

The Bombay High Court on 16 October set aside a GST demand of Rs. 62.42 lakh against Abracadabra India after finding that the tax department had uploaded the notices in a separate section of the GST portal, depriving the company of an opportunity to respond.

A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Karnik and Sandesh D. Patil held that the notices had not been uploaded in the regular “View Notices and Orders” section of the GST portal but in the “Additional Notices and Orders” section, which the company had failed to notice. The judges observed:

“In the present case also the notices were not placed in the view Notices and Orders portal. The petitioner was not heard and had no opportunity to present their case.”

The case arose from an order demanding Rs. 62,42,948 from Abracadabra India towards tax, interest and penalty. The company challenged the demand, stating that it had not received the show-cause notices and could not respond before the authorities passed the order.

Abracadabra India submitted that it learnt of the proceedings after receiving a phone call from the tax authorities in November 2023. It then asked its Chartered Accountant to check the GST portal, but the accountant could not find the show-cause notices.

Subsequently, the company's legal counsel discovered that the notices had been uploaded under the “Additional Notices and Orders” section. It argued that taxpayers ordinarily check the designated section of the portal for official communications and that uploading the notices elsewhere had left it unaware of the proceedings.

The tax department opposed the petition, maintaining that it had duly served the notices on the company.

The Court relied on its earlier decision in T.S. Lines India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, in which it had held that taxpayers could not be blamed for failing to notice communications that were not uploaded in the designated section of the GST portal. Applying that ruling, it found that Abracadabra India had not received an effective opportunity to present its case.

Accordingly, it set aside the impugned order and directed the parties to appear before the concerned tax authority on 27 October 2026. It permitted Abracadabra India to file its reply and directed the authority to pass a fresh order within four weeks of completion of the pleadings. It left the question of limitation concerning the show-cause notice open for the authority to consider.

For the petitioners: Senior Advocate Nikhil Sakhardande, assisted by Swagata.

For the State: AGP Himanshu Takke.

For Respondent 1: Jitendra B. Mishra, assisted by Ashutosh Mishra.

For Respondents 2 & 3: Jitendra B. Mishra, assisted by Sangeeta Yadav.