Order to Be Set Aside as No Opportunity for Hearing Was Granted to Assessee | HC

Case Details: Jain Distributors vs. State of U.P. - [2025] 172 taxmann.com 19 (Allahabad)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Pankaj Bhatia, J.
• Utkarsh Misra, Abhishek for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged an order passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017, whereby a tax demand was confirmed. It was contended that the notice issued by the department did not specify a date for a personal hearing, with “N.A.” recorded in the relevant column. Further, the impugned order did not mention that any opportunity of hearing had been granted. The petitioner argued that this omission violated Section 75(4) of the GST Act, which mandates affording an opportunity of hearing before passing an adverse order. Citing relevant judicial precedents, it was asserted that the order was legally unsustainable. The petition was filed before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the impugned order.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court held that Section 75(4) of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017, mandates granting an opportunity of hearing before passing an order confirming demand. Since the notice issued to the petitioner failed to specify a date for a personal hearing, and the impugned order did not record that such an opportunity was provided, the order was rendered unsustainable. Referring to binding judicial precedent, the Court reiterated that compliance with Section 75(4) is mandatory. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law, ensuring that the petitioner is granted an opportunity of hearing.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Atlas Cycles Haryana Ltd. v. State of U.P. [2024] 159 taxmann.com 718 (Allahabad) (para 7) followed