Ms Vip Iron Products vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s VIP Iron Products, challenged an adjudication order dated 17.05.2023, passed by the State of Punjab and another authority. The petitioner contended that the order was issued without granting them an opportunity of hearing. This alleged violation of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, formed the basis of their petition. The respondents did not deny the petitioner's assertion that no opportunity of hearing was provided prior to the impugned order.
Held
The Court held that the adjudication order dated 17.05.2023 (Annexure P-4) was liable to be set aside because the petitioner was not granted an opportunity of hearing prior to its issuance. The Court found that this failure violated the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court's reasoning was based on its own recent judgment in CWP No.33977 of 2025 – Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others, which dealt with a similar issue. The ratio decidendi is that an order passed without affording a hearing, when statutorily required or as a matter of natural justice, is unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned adjudication order was set aside. However, the Court granted liberty to the respondent-State to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law, pursuant to the show cause notice dated 16.02.2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the adjudication order dated 17.05.2023 is liable to be set aside on the ground that the petitioner was not granted an opportunity of hearing prior to its issuance, thereby violating principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the adjudication order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and specifically Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, as no opportunity of hearing was provided. They relied on a recent judgment of the High Court in CWP No.33977 of 2025 – Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others. Revenue/State's contention: The judgment records no argument from the respondent-State.
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. 163 )
CWP No. 11163 of 2026
Date of decision: 10.04.2026
M/s VIP Iron Products .....Petitioner
Versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present : Mr. Mohit Bassi, 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 17.05.2023 (Annexure P-4) on the ground that prior to issuance of such order no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner which not only violates of principles of natural justice but also Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. (2)
It is not denied that prior to the issuance of the impugned adjudication order the petitioner was not granted any opportunity of hearing therefore, the case of the petitioner is covered in its favour by a recent judgment given by us on 24.03.2026 in CWP No.33977 of 2025 – Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State
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.