M/S Vishal Jewellers vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vishal Jewellers, challenged an adjudication order dated 30.08.2024 and a subsequent appellate order dated 11.07.2025 that dismissed its appeal. The petitioner contended that the adjudication order was passed without providing an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The State counsel conceded that no personal hearing was granted to the petitioner prior to the adjudication order. The High Court considered this admission and the relevant statutory provision.
Held
The Court held that the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024 was in violation of the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which mandates that an opportunity of personal hearing must be provided to an assessee before any adverse action is contemplated. This view was supported by a recent decision of the Court in CWP No.33977 of 2025 – Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others. Consequently, the Court directed the setting aside of both the adjudication order and the appellate order. However, liberty was granted to the respondent-State to proceed afresh against the petitioner, provided they followed the provisions of law, including Section 75(4) of the Act, by offering a personal hearing.
Key Issues
1. Whether the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024 is liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, by not affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the adjudication order was invalid because no opportunity of hearing was provided, which contravenes the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Act. They sought the setting aside of both the adjudication order and the appellate order. Revenue's contention: The State counsel admitted that no personal hearing was granted to the petitioner before the adjudication order was passed.
Sections Cited
Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No. 131 CWP-9742-2026 Date of decision : 23.04.2026 M/s Vishal Jewellers
.…. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present : Mr. Gurkiran Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. R. S. Pandher, Addl. A. G., Punjab.
* * * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)
(1)
Through the instant petition challenge is made to the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure P-2) as also to the order dated 11.07.2025 (Annexure P-9) passed by the appellate authority through which the petitioner’s appeal, filed by it to challenge therein the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024,was dismissed. (2)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the afore referred impugned orders are liable to be set aside solely for the reason that prior to the passing of the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure P-2) no opportunity of hearing was even offered to the petitioner which not only violat
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.