Madras HC sets-aside order passed by the Revenue as ex-parte in light of proceedings being carried out through the common portal; Observing that the notices including reminder notices were uploaded only through the common portal under the tab “View Additional Notices/Orders”, holds that “….when the respondent-Department realizes the fact that the notice effected via, On-line

[17/03, 15:27] sekarreporter1: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxzGtSn_854NQWlstQpRWC5p-IgFULMUAD?si=ai8EEoIWY55e1Bul
[17/03, 15:27] sekarreporter1: [17/03, 15:14] sekarreporter1: Madras HC judge krishnan ramasamy sets-aside order passed by the Revenue as ex-parte in light of proceedings being carried out through the common portal; Observing that the notices including reminder notices were uploaded only through the common portal under the tab “View Additional Notices/Orders”, holds that “….when the respondent-Department realizes the fact that the notice effected via, On-line portal service does not fetch them any reply/response, instead of sticking on to the similar of mode of service by sending notices/reminders incessantly, they could change mode of service and this Court suggests that notice through RPAD would be the best mode of service, in which case, the assessee cannot take advantage of the notice being unnoticed or plead ignorance, and in the case of the same being not delivered due to reasons such as ‘No such addressee’, ‘Incorrect address’, proper endorsement to such effect would be available to the respondentDepartment, and in the case of acceptance by the assessee, acknowledgement of the same would be available, thereafter, there won’t be any fetter on the respondent-GST Department to proceed against the assessees in the manner known to law”; Putting the onus on the Revenue to ensure proper service of notices and orders, interprets Section 169(d) deciphering its objective by asserting “…..that though Section 169 (d) empowers the respondent-Department to sent notice via. Online Portal, the very same Section prescribes other modes of service as well, and hence, it is expected from the respondent-Department firstly to ensure as to whether mode of service adopted by them would be an effective service in reaping the expected result, since it is ultimate goal of the respondent to prevent any revenue loss being caused to the Government’s exchequer”; Terming the order as ‘ex-parte’, observes violation of principles of natural justice by holding that “…the traditional way of serving notice through RPAD would be the best mode of service, inasmuch as, the recent technological development, which enables the respondent-Department to send notice via. on-line services, have been invented only for the purpose of making the assessee to make them alert as to what is happening in their assessment proceedings immediately, however, when such purpose is not achieved, the better option that is available to the respondent is to adopt the traditional way of serving notice via. RPAD..”; Remands with clear directions to file reply within 14 days and passing of orders after affording opportunity for personal hearing; Exempts condition for pre-deposit albeit 80% of the tax being already deposited by the Assessee and allows writ petition:HC MAD
[17/03, 15:14] sekarreporter1: 👍👍