M/S Corbett Kyari Jungle Resort vs. The State Tax Officer

WPMB/856/2026HC UttarakhandGSTCNR UKHC01017671202606 October 2026Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Corbett Kyari Jungle Resort, challenged an order dated 11.07.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, for the Financial Year 2021-22. The petitioner's sole contention was that the show-cause notice dated 16.05.2025 did not specify a date for personal hearing, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the Act. The respondent, State Tax Officer, argued that the writ petition was filed with a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 11.07.2025. 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 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, constituted a clear violation of Section 75(4) of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017. This violation of the principles of natural justice vitiated the order. Consequently, the Court overruled the respondent's objection regarding the delay in filing the writ petition. The order dated 11.07.2025 was quashed. The Court directed the respondent to pass a fresh order after providing the petitioner an opportunity for a hearing, strictly in accordance with the law. No other issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, is vitiated due to the absence of a date for personal hearing in the show-cause notice, thereby violating Section 75(4) of the Act? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that Section 75(4) of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, mandates a date for personal hearing in the show-cause notice, and its absence renders the subsequent order invalid. They contended that principles of natural justice were violated. Respondent's argument: The respondent argued that the writ petition was filed with a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 11.07.2025.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 75(4)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

UKHC010176712026 2026:UHC:9051-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 856 OF 2026 6TH OCTOBER, 2026 M/s Corbett Kyari Jungle Resort …… Petitioner I Versus State Tax Officer, State Goods & Services Tax, Ramnagar …… Respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Tiwari, learned counsel through video conferencing Counsel for the respondent : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State through video conferencing The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT: (per Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2)

The petitioner-firm has assailed the order dated 11.07.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/ UKGST Act, 2017, in respect of Financial Year 2021-22. The sole submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-firm is that, in the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner-firm dated 16.05.2025, no date of personal hearing was fixed, although it is a mandatory requiremen

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.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

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.