Dm And Sons vs. State Of Haryana And Others

` 133 I M/s DM and S State of Harya CORAM: H H Present: M M ASHWANI K 1. A the writ petiti dated 24.03.2 been passed personal hear impugned. 2. L personal hear impugned, an due opportuni 3. hearing shall assessee. Sect “ IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIG CWP-1 Date of Sons Vs. ana and others HON’BLE THE ACTING CHI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROH Ms. Aakriti, Advocate for the pet Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. AG, Ha *** KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Or At the outset, learned counsel fo ion raises various issues, he conf 2026 (Annexure P/11) primarily in violation of principles of na ring was not afforded to the p Learned counsel for the revenu ring was not afforded to the p nd that fresh orders would be p ity of hearing to the petitioner. Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2 be granted where any adverse d tion 75(4) of the Act, reads as un “Section 75(4) in The Goods and NJAB AND HARYANA GARH 14838-2026 (O&M) f Decision: 22.07.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents IEF JUSTICE HIT KAPOOR titioner. aryana. ral) or the petitioner submits that, tho fines the challenge only to the o y on the ground that the same atural justice, as an opportunity petitioner before passing the o ue fairly admits that opportunity petitioner before passing the o passed in the matter, after afford 017, provides that an opportunit decision is contemplated agains nder:- d Services Tax Act, 2017: ough