The Madras High Court recently ruled on two key aspects of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) notice and service procedures. Here's what you need to know: *Key Points:* - *Service of Notice*: The court held that uploading a notice on the GST portal is a valid mode of service under Section 169 of the GST Act. However, it emphasized that tax officers should not treat GST notice service as a mere formality, especially when taxpayers fail to respond to electronic communications. - *Effective Service*: The court stressed that effective service requires exploring alternative modes, such as Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due (RPAD), when there's no response to portal notices. This ensures that taxpayers are adequately informed and have an opportunity to respond . *Reply to SCN:* - *Filing Methods*: The court directed that a reply to a Show Cause Notice (SCN) can be filed either physically or through the GST portal. - *Consideration by Officer*: The officer must consider the reply before passing an order, as failure to do so may violate the principles of natural justice . *Implications:* - *Taxpayer Awareness*: Taxpayers must be aware of the notices uploaded on the GST portal and respond accordingly to avoid adverse actions. - *Department's Responsibility*: The department should ensure effective service of notices, exploring alternative modes when necessary, to uphold the principles of natural justice . *Recent Cases:* - *M/s. Poomika Infra Developers vs. State Tax Officer*: The Madras High Court set aside an assessment order and directed the taxpayer to file objections within four weeks after depositing 25% of the disputed tax. - *Tvl. Sri Mathuru Eswarar Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer*: The court ruled that mere uploading of notices on the GST portal without ensuring receipt does not constitute valid service under Section 169 of the CGST Act .