GST Hearing Notices Sent To Wrong Email Address? Delhi High Court Asks Taxpayer To Approach Appellate Authority

The Delhi High Court has directed a taxpayer to challenge a GST demand of ₹4.49 crore before the statutory appellate authority after it alleged that notices fixing personal hearings during adjudication proceedings were sent to an incorrect email address.

The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar observed that the controversy concerning the service of hearing notices, including whether they were communicated to the correct registered email address, could appropriately be examined by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.

Petitioner contended that although the order recorded that personal hearings were fixed on February 3, 11 and 19, 2026, it had not received any communication regarding these dates through email, physical mode or the GST portal. It further argued that the hearing notices were sent to an incorrect email address.

Opposing the petition, the Department submitted that three opportunities of personal hearing had been granted and that notices were sent to the email address available in its records. It contended that the emails had not bounced back.

The High Court noted that the principal grievance of Petitioner concerned the alleged non-service of notices fixing personal hearings.

It observed that the question was not merely whether emails had been dispatched by the Department, but whether the notices were communicated in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions and to the relevant email address attributable to the petitioner at the material time.

"The Petitioner's assertion that its email particulars had been updated, and the Respondent's reliance upon the address available in their records, would have to be considered in the light of the relevant registration particulars and contemporaneous communications," the Court observed.

It further noted that the screenshot relied upon by Petitioner, the email communications relied upon by the Department and the registration particulars maintained by the Department would be relevant in determining whether the notices were sent to the email address registered against the petitioner's GST registration.

However, it observed that the existence of a dispute concerning natural justice would not by itself require the High Court to undertake a detailed factual inquiry in the exercise of writ jurisdiction when a statutory appellate remedy was available.

The Court held that the issues concerning service of hearing notices, alleged violation of Section 75(4) (opportunity of hearing) of the CGST Act, consideration of the petitioner's explanations and the merits of the tax demand could be urged before the statutory appellate authority.

As such, it relegated Petitioner to appellate remedy available under Section 107 CGST Act.

For Petitioner: Advocate Priyanka Goel

For Respondent: Shubham Tyagi, SSC along with Navruti Ojha.