Judgment
132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-29283-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10th September, 2026.
M/S. SHRI RAM ALLOYS
.…...Petitioner(s) V/s UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
......Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
Present Mr. R. Kartikeya, Advocate and
Mr. Viney Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Sharmila Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel, UOI, with Mr. Navnit Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
****
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral)
1.
Order-in-Original dated 29.12.2023 is primarily questioned on the ground that the same has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, as an opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded to the petitioners before passing the order impugned.
2.
Learned counsel for the revenue fairly admits that opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded to the petitioner before passing the Order-in-Original dated 29.12.2023, and that fresh orders would be passed in the matter, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
3.
Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, provides that an opportunity of hearing shall be granted where any adverse decision is SURESH KUMAR 2026.09.14 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-29283-2026 (O&M)
Page 2 of 2
contemplated against an assessee. Section 75(4) of the Act, reads as under:- “Section 75(4) in The Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017:
(4) An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.”
4.
Similar issue also came up for adjudication before the Division Bench of this Court in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP-33977-2025, decided on 24.03.2026, wherein, the Division Bench held as under:- 10.
“In the light of the above discussion, the present petition is accepted, resulting in the setting aside of the impugned adjudication/assessment order dated 23.08.2024 (Annexure P- 1). However, liberty is granted to the respondent-revenue to proceed against the petitioner but only after following the provisions of law including Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act.”
5.
In that view of the matter, the present petition also stands disposed of in terms of Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. (supra).
6.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
7.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] CHIEF JUSTICE
[ROHIT KAPOOR] JUDGE
September 10, 2026 Ess Kay
Whether speaking / reasoned :
Yes / No Whether Reportable
:
Yes / No SURESH KUMAR 2026.09.14 09:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document