Back
PANKAJ BHATIA
Ramji Kirana Store – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Bhatia, J.
Amendment application filed today in Court is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
3. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 20.02.2023 passed in exercise of powers under Section 73 of GST Act as well as the order dated 31.07.2023 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed.
4. Vide order dated 03.10.2023, learned counsel for the respondent/State was directed to produce the records to ascertain as to whether any hearing was granted to the petitioner during the assessment proceedings and during the appellate proceedings or not. The records have been produced, which are perused.
5. On the basis of the averments made in the writ petition as well as on perusal of the records, it is revealed that the petitioner who is registered under the GST Act was called upon by means of a notice issued under Section 73 of the GST Act read with Rule 142(5) of the GST Rules to file a reply to the allegations levelled. Thereafter, a reminder notice was also sent to the petitioner on 02.10.2022. In the reminder notice, the date by which the reply was to be submitted was
Procedural fairness is mandatory in administrative decisions, and failure to provide a hearing as required by statute invalidates adverse orders.
Compliance with Section 75(4) of the GST Act is essential to ensure fair hearing and upholds principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.
The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of granting a hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST Act before making any adverse decisions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
