M/S R Sales Corporation vs. State Of Punjab And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s R Sales Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 30.04.2024 (Annexure P-9) passed by the respondent-revenue. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The respondent-revenue did not dispute the fact that no personal hearing was granted before passing the adjudication order. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order. The petition was heard alongside other similar matters, including a recent judgment of the High Court dated 24.03.2026 in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others.

Held

The Court allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned adjudication order dated 30.04.2024 (Annexure P-9). The Court found that the respondent-revenue had not disputed the petitioner's contention that no opportunity of personal hearing was granted before passing the order. This failure to provide a personal hearing was held to be a violation of the principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court followed its previous judgment in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others. While setting aside the order, the Court granted liberty to the respondent-revenue to proceed against the petitioner afresh, but only after providing an opportunity of personal hearing in accordance with the law, including Section 75(4) of the Act. No other issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order dated 30.04.2024 (Annexure P-9) is liable to be set aside on the ground that it was passed without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, thus violating 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 adjudication order was passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, which is a violation of the principles of natural justice and specifically Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. They relied on the fact that the respondent-revenue did not dispute this procedural lapse. The petitioner also referred to a recent judgment of the High Court in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and others, which dealt with similar issues. Revenue's Arguments: The respondent-revenue did not dispute the petitioner's assertion that no personal hearing was granted before the passing of the impugned adjudication order. They did not present any arguments against the petitioner's claim regarding the violation of natural justice or Section 75(4) of the Act.