M/S Swiftline Transport Solutions Private Limited vs. State Of U.P. And Another
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Swiftline Transport Solutions Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated August 20, 2024, passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 73 of the UPGST/CGST Act for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020. The petitioner also challenged a notice dated May 24, 2024. Upon reviewing the show cause notice (Form GST DRC-01), the Court observed that the deadline for submitting a reply was June 22, 2024, while the date fixed for personal hearing was earlier, June 19, 2024. This indicated that no personal hearing was granted to the petitioner, and the matter was decided ex parte.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order dated August 20, 2024, passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 73 of the UPGST/CGST Act, could not be sustained. The primary reason for this decision was the violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the show cause notice provided a reply submission deadline of June 22, 2024, but scheduled the personal hearing for June 19, 2024. This discrepancy clearly indicated that the petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity to present their case before the order was passed, leading to an ex parte decision. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order. The petitioner was directed to submit a fresh reply to the show cause notice within two weeks from the date of the order. Following the submission of the reply, a fresh notice for personal hearing was to be issued, and a fresh order was to be passed in accordance with the law within twelve weeks from the date of the order. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated August 20, 2024, passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 73 of the UPGST/CGST Act is liable to be quashed for violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a personal hearing? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without granting a proper opportunity of hearing, as the date fixed for personal hearing was prior to the last date for submitting a reply to the show cause notice. This procedural lapse vitiated the order. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent State of U.P. and Another.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60140-DB Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1751 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Swiftline Transport Solutions Private Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Amit Biswas,Rishi Raj Kapoor Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
In the present writ petition following prayers have been made by the petitioner:- I. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 20.8.2024 passed by the respondent no.2 under Section 73 of the UPGST/CGST Act for the tax period of April 2019 to March 2020, FY 2019-2020 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). II. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 24.5.2024 issued by respondent no.2 [Annexure no.2] III. Issue any such other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
Upon perusal of show cause notice (Form GST DRC - 01) it is clear that the date, by which the reply was to be submitted, was June 22, 2024 whereas, the date of personal hearing given was prior to the same, that is, June 19, 2024. 4. In light of the above, it is clear that no personal hearing was granted to the petitioner and the matter was decided ex parte on August 20, 2024. 5. In light of the same, we are of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained as it appears to be passed without granting any opportunity of hearing. Accordingly, the impugned order dated
August 20, 2024 is quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to submit a fresh reply to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks from date. Once the reply is submitted, a fresh notice should be given for personal hearing, and thereafter, order should be passed in accordance with law. This entire exercise should be completed within a period of twelve weeks from date.
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Dev (Dr. Y. K. Srivastava,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.