Facts of the Case

In this batch of three connected writ petitions (WPMB 1016, 1017 and 1018 of 2025) decided by a common judgment, the lead petitioner, a taxable person registered under Uttarakhand GST, challenged an Order-in-Original dated 25.07.2024 passed by the State Tax Officer, Vikas Nagar, and the consequential Appellate Order dated 30.08.2025. The core grievance was that the show cause notice had fixed the date of personal hearing as 12.03.2024, while the last date for filing a reply was set later, on 24.03.2024, meaning the hearing was scheduled to occur before the petitioner could even file a considered response, effectively denying the statutory right to a personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the Uttarakhand GST Act.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether fixing the date of personal hearing before the deadline for filing a reply, in a GST show cause notice, amounts to denial of the opportunity of personal hearing under Section 75(4).
  2. Whether both the original order and the confirming appellate order should be set aside on this ground.
  3. Whether the issue stood covered by the Court's coordinate bench ruling in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 123 of 2025.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Since the show cause notice fixed 12.03.2024 for personal hearing but allowed the reply to be filed until 24.03.2024, the personal hearing was rendered a hollow formality, occurring before the petitioner's substantive defence was even due.
  • This defect went to the root of compliance with Section 75(4) of the Act, which mandates a genuine opportunity of hearing before an adverse order is passed, and the issue was identical to that already decided by a coordinate bench in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 123 of 2025.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State's Brief Holder conceded that an identical issue had already been decided by a coordinate bench of the same High Court in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 123 of 2025.

Court Order / Findings

  • Since the State's counsel conceded that the issue was already covered by a coordinate bench decision, the Court decided the batch of petitions in terms of that earlier ruling without independently re-examining the underlying tax demand.
  • A GST show cause notice that schedules the personal hearing before the deadline for filing a written reply defeats the purpose of the mandatory hearing requirement under Section 75(4) and renders any consequential order liable to be quashed, since a taxpayer cannot meaningfully be heard on a defence it has not yet been permitted to submit.
  • Both the original order and the appellate order were set aside in line with the earlier coordinate bench ruling, and the matter was to proceed afresh consistent with that precedent's directions.

Important Clarification

  • A personal hearing scheduled to occur before the deadline for filing a written reply to a GST show cause notice does not satisfy Section 75(4), because the taxpayer cannot be meaningfully heard on submissions it has not yet been permitted to make.
  • This is a distinct natural-justice ground from the 'additional notices tab' service-defect line of cases, focusing instead on the internal sequencing of dates within a validly served notice.
  • Batching connected writ petitions raising the identical legal defect, and disposing of them by a common judgment while detailing facts of only the lead matter, is a standard case-management practice in such recurring GST litigation.

Sections Involved

  • Section 75(4), Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 – mandates an opportunity of personal hearing where an adverse decision is contemplated or on request, the core provision breached here.
  • Section 73, Uttarakhand GST Act, 2017 – determination of tax not paid, under which the original order was passed.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision is in favour of the assessee(s). Both the original and appellate orders across the batch of connected petitions were set aside for denial of a genuine opportunity of personal hearing.

Case Details

High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital; WPMB 1016/2025 with WPMB 1017/2025 and WPMB 1018/2025 (Case No. 2025:UHC:11562-DB); Coram: Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Justice Subhash Upadhyay; Decided on 24.12.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.