Ms Ms Ra Traders vs. The Commissioner State Tax Headquarters
Facts
The petitioner, M/s R.A Traders, challenged an order dated 29.05.2025 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 05.04.2025 did not fix a date for personal hearing, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the Act. The respondents, the Commissioner, State Tax, and another, argued that the writ petition was filed with a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 29.05.2025. The Court noted that the absence of a fixed date for personal hearing 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, 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 dated 29.05.2025. Consequently, the Court overruled the objection regarding the slight delay in the petitioner approaching the Court. The order dated 29.05.2025 was quashed. The Court directed the respondent no. 2 to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated 29.05.2025 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? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the show-cause notice issued on 05.04.2025 failed to fix a date for personal hearing, which is a mandatory procedural requirement under Section 75(4) of the Act. This omission, they contended, violates the principles of natural justice and renders the subsequent order invalid. Respondents' contention: The respondents argued that the writ petition was filed with a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 29.05.2025. They did not dispute the petitioner's assertion regarding the absence of a fixed 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.)
Heard Mr. Tarun Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner-firm, and Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/ Revenue Department.
The petitioner-firm has assailed the order dated 29.05.2025 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 05.04.2025, no date of personal hearing was fixed, although it is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the A
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.