Jai Ambey Construction Company vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, Jai Ambey Construction Company, challenged a show cause notice dated 03.06.2025 and an order dated 01.08.2025 passed by respondent No. 2 under Section 74 of the Punjab/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the assessment period, 2024-2025, did not fall within the ambit of Section 74, that their objections were not considered, and that they were denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The revenue, represented by the Additional Advocate General, Punjab, agreed to remit the matter back to the concerned authority for a fresh order.
Held
The Court noted the fair stand taken by the learned counsel for the respondents-revenue. In view of this, the Court decided to remit the matter back to the concerned authority. The impugned order dated 01.08.2025 was set aside. The respondents were granted liberty to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The Court explicitly stated that all legal and factual issues would remain open for consideration before the authority concerned. The ratio of this decision is that where the revenue concedes to procedural lapses and agrees to provide a proper hearing, the High Court may remit the matter for fresh adjudication, setting aside the prior order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the jurisdiction to invoke Section 74 of the Punjab/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was erroneously exercised for the assessment period 2024-2025? The petitioner argued that Section 74 was not applicable to the said period. The revenue did not present a specific argument on this point but agreed to a remittance. 2. Whether the petitioner was denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing? The petitioner contended that a reasonable opportunity of hearing was not afforded. The revenue conceded this point and agreed to provide a personal hearing. The court had to decide if the invocation of Section 74 was proper and if the principles of natural justice were followed.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
245-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-4920-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 4th July, 2026. JAI AMBEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
.…...Petitioner(s) V/s STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
......Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
Present Mr. Chetan Jain, Advocate and
Mr. Porush Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
****
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
This petition seeks to challenge show cause notice dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P-3) as well as order dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure P-4), passed by respondent No.2 under Section 74 of the Punjab/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2017”).
The challenge is primarily on the ground that the juri iction to invoke Section 74 of the Act of 2017 has been erroneously exercised, inasmuch as the assessment pertains to the period 2024-2025, which does not fall within the ambit of Section 74 of the Act of 2017. It is contended that such objections taken by the petitioner has not been appropriately considered by the
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.