Sanprins Power Solutions Private Limited vs. The State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Sanprins Power Solutions Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 08.01.2026 passed by the respondent, the State Tax Officer. Initially, a refund was sanctioned on 01.12.2025. Subsequently, the respondent passed a suo-moto rectification order on 08.01.2026, rejecting the refund. The petitioner contended that this order was passed without providing any prior notice, thus violating principles of natural justice. The respondent's counsel confirmed these submissions. The disputed refund amount is Rs. 39,27,935/-.

Held

The Court held that the impugned suo-moto rectification order dated 08.01.2026, which rejected the refund, was passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court noted that while the initial refund sanction order dated 01.12.2025 was passed after issuing a show cause notice and providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, the subsequent rectification order was passed without any prior notice. The Court emphasized that it is mandatory for the respondent to provide sufficient opportunity to the petitioner before passing any adverse order. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated 08.01.2026 and remanded the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent was directed to issue due notice, provide sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, and then pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within eight weeks.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned rectification order dated 08.01.2026, rejecting the refund, is liable to be quashed for being passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the requirement of providing prior notice to the petitioner? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that the respondent passed the rectification order rejecting the refund without issuing any prior notice, which is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. They sought to set aside the order and be granted an opportunity to present their case. Respondent's argument: The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent confirmed the petitioner's submissions regarding the lack of prior notice and requested the Court to pass appropriate orders.