Bala Ji Enterprises vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Bala Ji Enterprises, challenged an order-in-original dated December 18, 2025, passed by the revenue authorities. This order disposed of 147 cases, including the petitioner's. The petitioner contended that while they had filed a reply to the show-cause notice dated June 28, 2025, on September 2, 2025, through the common GST portal, this reply was neither referred to nor dealt with in the impugned order. The petitioner argued that this omission rendered the order arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. The respondents, represented by the Additional Solicitor General, did not dispute that the petitioner's reply was uploaded on the portal but conceded that it had not been considered in the impugned order.

Held

The Court held that the impugned order, insofar as it concerned the petitioner, was violative of the principles of natural justice and arbitrary because the petitioner's reply to the show-cause notice had not been considered. The Court noted that the respondents did not dispute the petitioner's assertion that the reply was uploaded on the GST portal on September 2, 2025, and conceded that it had not been dealt with in the impugned order. Therefore, the Court found that the principles of natural justice were breached. The ratio decidendi is that an order passed without considering a party's reply to a show-cause notice is arbitrary and a violation of natural justice. The Court set aside the impugned order dated December 18, 2025, qua the petitioner and remitted the matter back to the competent authority. The authority was directed to pass a fresh order after duly considering the petitioner's reply filed on September 2, 2025, and to afford the petitioner an opportunity of hearing before passing any fresh order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order-in-original dated December 18, 2025, passed by the revenue authorities, is arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice concerning the petitioner, Bala Ji Enterprises, due to the non-consideration of its reply to the show-cause notice dated June 28, 2025? The petitioner argued that the failure of the revenue authority to refer to or deal with their reply, filed on September 2, 2025, in the impugned order constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice and renders the order arbitrary. The respondents conceded that the petitioner's reply was uploaded on the GST portal but admitted that it was not dealt with in the impugned order. No further arguments were recorded for the respondents on this issue.