M/S Guru Nanak Plywood And Laminates,Lko. Thru. Proprietor Mr.Attam Khatwani vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax,Lucknow And 3 Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Guru Nanak Plywood and Laminates, through its proprietor Mr. Attam Khatwani, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 30.04.2024 passed under Section 73 of the GST Act. The petitioner contended that after submitting a reply to the show cause notice with supporting documents, no hearing date was communicated. The respondent, State of U.P. through the Additional Chief Secretary, State Tax, and three others, stated that a hearing date was fixed and available on the GST portal, which the petitioner failed to avail. The petitioner countered that notices were uploaded on an additional tab and were not visible to them.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity of hearing. Relying on its previous decision in Ola Fleet Technologies Private Limited vs. State of U.P. and two others (Writ Tax No.855 of 2024, decided on 22.07.2024), the Court found that the opportunity of hearing had not been given. Consequently, the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 was quashed. The matter was remanded to the concerned authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law, ensuring that the petitioner is given an adequate opportunity of hearing. The writ petition was allowed with these observations.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner was afforded a proper opportunity of hearing before the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 was passed under Section 73 of the GST Act, considering the petitioner's claim of not being communicated a hearing date and the respondent's assertion of the date being available on the portal. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that despite submitting a reply to the show cause notice and annexing supporting documents, no hearing date was communicated. They further contended that notices were uploaded on an 'additional tab' and were therefore not visible to them, thus denying them a fair opportunity to be heard. Respondent's argument: The Standing Counsel, based on instructions, stated that a hearing date was indeed fixed and was available on the GST portal. They argued that the petitioner did not avail this remedy, implying the petitioner was responsible for missing the hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20486 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 278 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Guru Nanak Plywood And Laminates, Lko. Thru. Proprietor Mr. Attam Khatwani Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax,Lucknow And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Punit Kumar Srivastava, Ishank Srivastava, Rakesh Srivastava, Shashank Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Order Date :- 11.4.2025 VNP/- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.