Mandeep Steels vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

CWP/1960/2026HC Punjab and HaryanaGSTCNR PHHC01012417202625 May 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Mandeep Steels, challenged an adjudication order dated 05.07.2024 passed by the respondents. It was not disputed that prior to this order, the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner contended that this violated principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondents' counsel attempted to distinguish the petitioner's case from a recent judgment of the same High Court in CWP-33977-2025, 'Kemexel Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others'. The Court considered the applicability of the Kemexel case to the petitioner's situation.

Held

The Court held that the adjudication order dated 05.07.2024 (Annexure P-3) was quashed. The reasoning was that the order was passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, which violates the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court found that the respondents had not been able to distinguish the petitioner's case from the precedent set in 'Kemexel Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others'. The ratio decidendi is that a statutory adjudication order passed without providing a personal hearing, when mandated by principles of natural justice and specific statutory provisions like Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, is unsustainable. The Court granted liberty to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order dated 05.07.2024, passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, violates the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the lack of a personal hearing before the adjudication order was passed contravened the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. They relied on the High Court's recent judgment in CWP-33977-2025, 'Kemexel Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others', asserting its applicability to their case. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents (Union of India and others) argued that the petitioner's case could be distinguished from the 'Kemexel Commerce Pvt. Ltd.' judgment. They failed to establish this distinction.

Sections Cited

Section 75(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE MANDEEP ST UNION OF IN CORAM : H H Present : M M M DEEPAK SIB It adjudication o was afforded natural justice Services Tax A 2. In covered in its 24.03.2026 in of Punjab and 3. L distinguish th (supra) to the p Sr. No.162 E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH CWP- 196 Date of De TEELS Versus NDIA AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA Mr. Anurag Sharma, Advocate fo Mr. Prashant Rana, Junior Standin Mr. Saruabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., *** BAL, J. (Oral) t is not disputed that prior to order dated 05.07.2024, no opp to the petitioner, which not on but also contravenes Section 75 Act, 2017. n the light of the above, the

s favour by a recent judgment CWP-33977-2025 ‘Kemexel Ec d others’. earned counsel for the respond e applicability of Kemexel E petitioner’s case. B AND HARYANA AT H 60-2026 ecision :25.05.2026

…PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS AK SIBAL A BANERJI r the petitioner. ng Counsel for the UOI. Punjab. o passing of the impugned portunity of personal hearing nly violates the principles of 5(4) of the Central Goods an

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.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

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.