M/S Vighnaharta Constructions Thru. Its Proprietor Vishnu Bhagwan Shukla vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Commissioner , CGST And Central Excise Lko And 2 Others
Held
The Court held that the impugned orders dated July 14, 2021, and December 26, 2022, were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. Following the precedent set in Writ Tax No. 143 of 2023, the Court quashed both orders. The reasoning was based on the admission by the respondents' counsel that the petitioner was not given a hearing. The Court found this procedural lapse to be fatal to the validity of the orders. The matter was remanded to respondent no. 3 to pass a fresh order after affording the petitioner an adequate opportunity of hearing, in accordance with the law. The writ petition was allowed in terms of this direction.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vighnaharta Constructions, through its Proprietor Vishnu Bhagwan Shukla, filed a writ petition challenging two orders: one dated July 14, 2021, and another dated December 26, 2022. The respondents are the State of U.P. through the Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Lucknow, and two others. The court noted that the facts pleaded were similar to a previously decided case, Writ Tax No. 143 of 2023. Instructions from the Standing Counsel for the respondents confirmed that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner by the department before passing the impugned orders.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned orders dated July 14, 2021, and December 26, 2022, are liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a hearing, under the relevant provisions of the GST Act and Rules. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the orders were passed without granting them an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. They relied on the grounds and analogy from a similar case, Writ Tax No. 143 of 2023, decided by the same court. Respondent's Contention: The counsel for the respondents, through instructions taken on record, conceded that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner by the department. They did not present any counter-arguments against the petitioner's claim regarding the lack of hearing.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
facts Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:68528
Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 144 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Vighnaharta Constructions Thru. Its Proprietor Vishnu Bhagwan Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Commissioner , Cgst And Central Excise Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sachin Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Dipak Seth,C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ratnesh Lal the counsel for the Union of India as well as the learned Standing Counsel.
The facts as pleaded in the writ petition are similar to the one decided by this Court in Writ Tax No.143 of 2023 (M/s o
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.