GST

Fixing date of personal hearing prior to date of filing reply – GST order quashed

Fixing date of personal hearing prior to the date of filing of reply showed non application of mind – High Court

In a recent judgment, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court quashed GST order u/s 73 of UPGST Act 2017 as the date of personal hearing was fixed prior to the date of filing of reply and even after the reply was filed, no date was fixed for grant of personal hearing.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4604 (2025) (06) abcaus.in HC

In the instant case, the assessee by way of a Writ Petition challenged the order passed under Section 73 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act).

It was submitted that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Section 73 of the Act, wherein the date of filing reply was indicated in the month of June, however, date of personal hearing was fixed in the month of May i.e. before the last date of filing the reply.

It was submitted that the petitioner had filed his reply on the date fixed in the month of June, however though the order impugned was passed in the month of August, no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner, which was in violation of provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act and, therefore, the orders deservd to be quashed and set aside.

The respondent Department, submitted that irrespective of the wrong indication of dates in the show cause notice, there was sufficient gap between the date of filing of reply and passing of the final order and the petitioner could have appeared before the authority for personal hearing. However, no attempt was made and, therefore, the petition deserved dismissal.

The Hon’ble High Court noted that a perusal of the show cause notice clearly revealed that the authority without application of mind, has fixed date of personal hearing prior to the date of filing of reply and even after the reply was filed, no date had been fixed for grant of personal hearing.

The Hon’ble High Court held that the action of the authorities, clearly reflected violation of principles of natural justice and provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act.

Consequently, the petition was allowed and the order impugned was quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the authority with direction to fix a date of personal hearing and after hearing the petitioner, pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.  

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Trust accredited by National Open School eligible for registration u/s 12AB & u/s 80G

Trust accredited by National Institute of Open Schooling eligible for registration u/s.12AB and u/s 80G of the Act. In a…

2 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Delay in furnishing Form 10B – Covid Period to be excluded as per decision of Supreme Court

Delay in furnishing Form 10B – Period between 15.03.2020 till 20.08.2022 to be excluded as per decision of Hon'ble Supreme…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Section 271AAB does not grant any immunity from penalty in terms of section 273B

Section 271AAB does not grant any immunity from penalty even if the assessee was able to show some reasonable cause…

2 days ago
  • Empanelment

Engagement of ‘Young Professional’ in the office of the PCCT Bihar & Jharkhand

Engagement of 'Young Professional' in the office of the PCCT Bihar & Jharkhand Engagement of 'Young Professional' in the office…

4 days ago
  • Empanelment

CGPDTM invites applications for hiring contractual manpower and Young Professionals

CGPDTM invites applications for hiring contractual manpower and Young Professionals The Controller General Patents, Designs & Trade Marks has invited…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Sundry creditors can’t be treated income u/s 41(1) because recovery barred by limitation

Sundry creditors outstanding in books can’t be treated income u/s 41(1) merely because recovery was barred by limitation - ITAT…

4 days ago