Harphool Singh And Another vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioners, engaged in manufacturing combines, filed a writ petition seeking restoration/unlocking of their GST user IDs and information on how third parties can access confidential GST data. Their IDs were blocked by the respondent-Transport Department based on complaints filed by respondent No.7, who had a dispute with petitioner No.1. These complaints alleged violations of Central Motor Vehicle Rules and misrepresentation of engine numbers. The respondent-GST department inquired about the source of data shared by respondent No.7. The petitioners argued their IDs were blocked without an order or hearing. The State counsel conceded that no order had been passed but assured a speaking order would be issued after a hearing within a week.
Held
The Court held that the blocking of the petitioners' GST user IDs without a speaking order and without providing an opportunity of hearing was not legally sustainable. The State counsel's concession that no order had been passed, coupled with the assurance to pass a speaking order within a week after granting a hearing, formed the basis of the Court's decision. The Court disposed of the petition based on this understanding. The operative direction was that the competent authority shall pass speaking orders after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners were directed to appear before respondent No.3 on 04.05.2026 at 11:00 AM and thereafter as directed by the authority. The issue regarding the criteria for third-party access to confidential GST data was not expressly decided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the blocking of the petitioners' GST user IDs by the respondents without passing a formal order and without affording an opportunity of hearing is legally sustainable? The petitioners argued that their user IDs were blocked arbitrarily, without any formal order being passed by the authorities and without being given a chance to present their case. They contended that this action was in violation of principles of natural justice. The respondents, through the State counsel, initially stated that show cause notices were served. However, when pressed by the Court, the State counsel conceded that no speaking order had been passed to date. The State assured that a speaking order would be passed after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a week.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
**** 153
CWP-13258-2026 Date of Decision: 30.04.2026 …Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:- Mr. Mahir Sood, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioners
Ms. Neha Sonawane, DAG Punjab
*** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondents to restore/unlock their user IDs. They are also seeking direction to respondent No.4 & 6 to furnish status report with detailed criteria as to how a third party can obtain access to confidential/secret GST data of their assessee.
The petitioners are engaged in the business of manufacturing combines. Petitioner No.1 had purchased a piece of land adjoining the land of brother-in-law of respondent No.7 with whom he had some dispute. Respondent No.7 is having enmity with the petitioners as petitioner No.2 was in support of petitioner
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.