Ms Danish Ali Pasha vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Danish Ali Pasha, challenged an order dated 13.01.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/UKGST Act, 2017, pertaining to the Financial Year 2020-21. The petitioner's sole contention was that the show-cause notice dated 21.11.2024, issued by the respondent authority, failed to fix a date for personal hearing, which is a mandatory requirement. The respondents, represented by the State of Uttarakhand, raised a preliminary objection regarding the delay in filing the present writ petition, as the impugned order was passed on 13.01.2025.
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, 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 13.01.2025. The Court overruled the objection regarding the delay in filing the writ petition, considering the violation of natural justice. Consequently, the order dated 13.01.2025 was quashed. The Court directed the respondent authority 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 13.01.2025 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 principles of natural justice and Section 75(4) of the Act? Petitioner's contention: 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 Act, renders the subsequent order invalid. They emphasized that this procedural lapse violates fundamental principles of natural justice. Respondents' contention: The respondents argued that the writ petition suffers from a delay, as the impugned order was passed on 13.01.2025, and the petition was filed subsequently. They did not dispute 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.)
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 13.01.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/ UKGST Act, 2017, in respect of Financial Year 2020-21. The sole submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-firm is that, in the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner-firm dated 21.11.2024, 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.