Communication On Email Address Is Sufficient Service Under Section 169 GST Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that under Section 169(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, a communication sent to an email address provided at the time of GST registration is adequate service of a decision, order, summons or notice or any other communication.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed,

“With respect to Section169 of the Act, this Court has also taken a view recently in W.P. (C) 4374/2025 titled Rishi Enterprises through its Proprietor v. Additional Commissioner Central Tax Delhi, North & Anr. that communication on the email address is sufficient communication.”

The development comes in a firm's plea to set aside tax demand of Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 81,54,990/-. The challenge was raised on the ground that the notices for personal hearing were not received by the Petitioner.

The Court had previously asked the Department to place on record any documents to show that the personal hearing notices were given to the Petitioner.

Accordingly, the Department produced a set of documents, along with an affidavit, showing that three opportunities for hearing were given to the Petitioner vide two hearing notices.

For the first hearing on 16th January, 2025, an e-mail was sent to the registered e-mail address provided by the Petitioner.

The second notice fixing the dates for personal hearing on 23rd January, 2025 and 29th January, 2025, was sent by e-mail.

While the Petitioner argued that the email in question was not his but that of his Chartered Accountant, the Court held,

“the e-mail address which has been provided on the GST portal is presumed to be the registered email of the proprietor itself and is not reflected merely as a GST practitioner or consultant's e-mail…Thus, in this case, the Court is satisfied that by both the e-mails, the proper hearing notices have been given to the Petitioner.”

The Court also rapped the Petitioner for concealing from the Court that notices for personal hearing were received on the registered e-mail address.

“The plea of Natural Justice was raised vehemently, until the Department established that emails were sent. Thereafter the plea being taken is that the emails were sent to the email address of the Chartered Accountant. This Court has already noted above that the said email was the registered email address of the Petitioner on the CGST portal. Thus, the notices were rightly sent and this Court is also of the opinion that the relevant and material facts have been concealed from the Court.”

The petition was accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the CGST Department.

Also Read: [S.169 CGST Act] Service On Registered Email Is Sufficient For Calculating Limitation Period: Allahabad High Court

Also Read: What Constitutes Valid Service Of Notice U/S 169 Of CGST Act? Madras High Court Clarifies

Appearance: Mr. Akhil Krishan Maggu, Mr. Vikas Sareen, Mr. Aryan Nagpal, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC with Mr. Harsh Singhal and Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Advs. for Respondents

Case title: M/s Mathur Polymers v. Union of India & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1493

Case no.: W.P.(C) 2394/2025

Click here to read order