M/S N B Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, M/s N B Enterprises, challenged an order dated 16.02.2024 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, concerning the Financial Year 2018-19. The petitioner's primary contention was that the show-cause notice dated 30.11.2023 did not specify a date for personal hearing, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the Act. The respondent, Assistant Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, Haldwani, argued that the writ petition was filed with a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 16.02.2024. The Court noted that the absence of a personal hearing date in the show-cause notice was not disputed.
Held
The Court held that the absence of a fixed date for personal hearing in the show-cause notice, and the failure to provide such an opportunity at any stage before passing the impugned order, constitutes a clear violation of Section 75(4) of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017. This violation of the principles of natural justice vitiates the order dated 16.02.2024. The Court overruled the objection regarding the delay in filing the writ petition, emphasizing that the violation of natural justice principles takes precedence. Consequently, the order dated 16.02.2024 was quashed. The Court directed the respondent to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in strict accordance with the law. The ratio decidendi is that a mandatory procedural requirement for personal hearing, as stipulated in Section 75(4), must be adhered to, and its violation, even if the petition is filed with some delay, warrants quashing of the order and a fresh opportunity for hearing.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated 16.02.2024 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, is vitiated due to the absence of a fixed date for personal hearing in the show-cause notice, thereby violating Section 75(4) of the Act? 2. Whether the delay in filing the writ petition should be condoned in light of the violation of principles of natural justice? The petitioner argued that the failure to fix a date for personal hearing in the show-cause notice, as mandated by Section 75(4) of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, renders the subsequent order invalid. The petitioner contended that this omission constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice. The respondent argued that the writ petition was filed belatedly, as the impugned order was passed on 16.02.2024, and the petition was filed later. The respondent did not dispute the factual assertion regarding the absence of a personal hearing date in the show-cause notice.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT: (per Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
1)
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2)
The petitioner-firm has assailed the order dated 16.02.2024 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/ UKGST Act, 2017, in respect of Financial Year 2018-19. The sole submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-firm is that, in the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner-firm dated 30.11.2023, no date of personal hearing was fixed, although it is a mandatory requirement u
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.