M/S Kalindee Rail Nirman (E) Limited Rahee Infratech Limited And Anr vs. The Senior Joint Commissioner Of Revenue, Kolkata South Circle, Wbgst And Ors

Held

The Court held that the uploading of notices and orders under the "additional notices and orders" tab of the GST portal did not constitute proper service or communication of the proceedings to the petitioners. This manner of service was found to be improper, as established in the case of Sankar Agarwala (supra) and a Division Bench judgment in Ram Kumar Sinhal vs. State of West Bengal. Consequently, the petitioners were prevented by sufficient cause from responding to the show-cause notice. Furthermore, the adjudication order dated April 24, 2024, was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing, despite an adverse decision being contemplated, which violates Section 75(4) of the said Act of 2017 and the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside. The Court granted the petitioners two weeks from the date of the order to file their reply to the show-cause notice, and directed the adjudicating authority to conclude the proceedings within four weeks of the reply's filing, without unnecessary adjournment. The Court expressly left undecided the challenge to the vires of notifications dated March 31, 2023, and December 31, 2023, as the petitioners did not press that prayer.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s. Kalindee Rail Nirman (E) Limited and another, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated April 24, 2024, passed by the Senior Joint Commissioner of Revenue, Kolkata South Circle, under Section 73 of the WBGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioners claim they were unaware of the proceedings, including a scrutiny notice dated July 13, 2023, a pre-show-cause notice (DRC-01A), a show-cause notice under Section 73 dated December 19, 2023, and the final demand order (DRC-07). They contend these were uploaded on the GST portal under the "additional notices and orders" tab, which they did not check. They only became aware of the demand order after recovery was made from their electronic cash ledger on July 31, 2025, following a recovery notice to their bank.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of notices and orders pertaining to adjudication proceedings under the "additional notices and orders" tab of the GST portal constitutes proper service and communication to the assessee, thereby satisfying the requirements of the said Act of 2017 and principles of natural justice? (Question of law) 2. Whether the adjudication order dated April 24, 2024, passed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners, despite an adverse decision being contemplated, is violative of Section 75(4) of the said Act of 2017 and the principles of natural justice? (Question of mixed law and fact) Petitioner's Arguments: - Notices and orders uploaded under the "additional notices and orders" tab were not properly served as the petitioners had no reason to check this tab, leading to their unawareness of the proceedings. - By the time they became aware of the adjudication order, the time to file an appeal had lapsed. - The show-cause notice dated December 19, 2023, was illegal as it negated any opportunity for personal hearing, which is mandated by statute. - The adjudication order, based on such a show-cause notice, violates principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the said Act of 2017. - Relied on the Co-Ordinate Bench judgment in Sankar Agarwala vs. The Joint Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Appeal), Siliguri Appeal Commissionerate & Ors. (WPA 2116 of 2025). Revenue's Arguments: - The judgment records that the learned Advocate for the respondents had "little resistance to offer in the facts of the present case."