M/S Kallu Cable vs. The Commissioner State Goods And Service Tax

Held

The Court found that the issue raised by the petitioner was covered by a judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench in WPMB/316/2025. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of that judgment. The reasoning likely followed the precedent that denial of a mandatory personal hearing, especially when the notice was not effectively served or acknowledged by the assessee, violates principles of natural justice. The Court likely held that the presumption drawn in the show cause notice was unsustainable. The operative direction was to dispose of the present petition in terms of the earlier judgment, implying a remand or setting aside of the impugned order to allow for a fresh decision after providing a proper opportunity of hearing.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kallu Cable, filed a writ petition challenging an Assessment Order in Form GST DRC-07 for the Financial Year 2023-24, passed by Respondent No. 2. The petitioner also sought to quash the Show Cause Notice dated 13/06/2024. The petitioner's primary contention was that they were denied a personal hearing, which is mandatory under Section 75(4) of the Uttarakhand GST Act. The petitioner argued that the notice was sent via the web portal and they were unaware of it. The revenue contended that the facts of the present case were different from similar cases. The show cause notice itself stated that failure to reply within thirty days would be presumed as the petitioner not wishing for a personal hearing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Assessment Order and Show Cause Notice are liable to be quashed for violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the denial of a personal hearing, in light of Section 75(4) and Section 169 of the CGST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner was denied a mandatory personal hearing as stipulated under Section 75(4) of the Uttarakhand GST Act. - The notice dated 13.06.2024, issued under Section 74 of the Act, was sent via the web portal, and the petitioner was unaware of its contents. - The presumption in the show cause notice that failure to reply within thirty days implies waiver of personal hearing is legally unsustainable. - Relied on a coordinate bench judgment in WPMB/316/2025 concerning an identical issue. Revenue's Arguments: - The facts of the present case are somewhat different from other cases.