Ms Sunil Traders vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate

Facts

The petitioner, M/S Sunil Traders, challenged an order-in-original dated 13.12.2023, passed by the State Tax Officer under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, and a subsequent order dated 06.08.2025 cancelling the petitioner's GST registration. The cancellation of registration was a consequence of the petitioner's alleged default in paying the tax amount determined in the order-in-original. The petitioner contended that the order-in-original was passed without providing a date for personal hearing, violating Section 75(4) of the Act. The Revenue conceded that the impugned order was indeed passed without affording an opportunity of hearing, noting that 'NA' was mentioned against the Personal Hearing column in the show cause notice.

Held

The Court held that the order-in-original dated 13.12.2023, passed by the State Tax Officer, was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. This decision was based on the finding that the order was passed without providing the petitioner with an opportunity of personal hearing, which is a mandatory procedural requirement under Section 75(4) of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act. The Court noted that the Revenue conceded this point and that the show cause notice itself indicated 'NA' for personal hearing, which contravened the statutory procedure. Consequently, as the order-in-original was quashed, the consequential order dated 06.08.2025, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration, was also quashed. The Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the department to proceed from the stage of the show cause notice dated 22.09.2023 strictly in accordance with law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order-in-original dated 13.12.2023, passed by the State Tax Officer under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, is vitiated for non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, as stipulated under Section 75(4) of the Act? The petitioner argued that the order-in-original was passed in violation of Section 75(4) of the Act, which mandates an opportunity of hearing before passing an adverse order. The Revenue, represented by the Standing Counsel, did not dispute this contention and acknowledged that the show cause notice indicated 'NA' for personal hearing, contrary to the prescribed procedure.