Ms Jai Baba Industries vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Jai Baba Industries, challenged an adjudication order dated 15.12.2025, passed by the State of Punjab and others. The order was issued under Section 74A(1) read with Section 74A(5)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The core of the petitioner's grievance was that this adjudication order was passed without any prior notice being served upon them. The State of Punjab and others were the respondents. The tax period is not specified in the judgment. The amount in dispute is also not stated.
Held
The Court held that the impugned adjudication order dated 15.12.2025, passed under Section 74A(1) read with Section 74A(5)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was not preceded by any notice. The Court found this to be a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, it was in conflict with Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act, which mandates that an opportunity of being heard shall be granted before passing any order that is adverse to the assessee. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned adjudication order. The Court granted liberty to the State to proceed afresh against the petitioner in accordance with the law, implying that a fresh adjudication process, including the issuance of a proper notice and an opportunity to be heard, should be undertaken.
Key Issues
1. Whether the adjudication order dated 15.12.2025, passed under Section 74A(1) read with Section 74A(5)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is violative of the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act, given that it was passed without any prior notice to the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the impugned adjudication order was passed without any notice, which violates the fundamental principles of natural justice and the specific provisions of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that such an order is unsustainable in law. The respondents (State of Punjab and others) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the lack of notice or the validity of the order.
Sections Cited
Section 74A(1), Section 74A(5)(i), Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
( Sr. No. 150 )
CWP No. 11059 of 2026
Date of decision: 10.04.2026
M/s Jai Baba Industries .....Petitioner
Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present : Mr. Vishav Bharti Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. R.S. Pandher, Addl. A. G., Punjab for respondents No.1&2. Mr. Gurinder Jit Singh, Advocate for respondent No.3-UOI.
* * *
DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) (1)
It is not disputed that the impugned adjudication order dated 15.12.2025, passed under Section 74A (1) read with Section 74A(5)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short – the 2017 Act), was not preceded by any notice. (2)
In the light of the above, the impugned adjudication order dated 15.12.2025 is not only violative of the principles of natural justice but is also in conflict with Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act. Therefore, the impugned adjudication order dated 15.12.2025 is set aside with liberty to the State to proceed afresh against th
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.