Facts of the Case

M/S Bharat Traders, through its proprietor Shama Ansari, challenged an order dated 09.05.2024 imposing interest and penalty and a subsequent appellate order dated 16.07.2025 dismissing its appeal without a hearing. The petitioner's case was that the notice of hearing during the assessment stage carried the same date as the last date for filing a reply, effectively denying any real opportunity to be heard, and that the appeal notices were uploaded only on the “additional” tab of the GST portal.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an assessment order passed under the GST Act without affording a genuine opportunity of personal hearing, as mandated by Section 75(4), can be sustained.
  2. Whether an appellate order passed without hearing the appellant is valid.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No personal hearing was granted at the assessment stage; the date fixed for hearing coincided with the date for filing a reply, making compliance impossible.
  • The appeal was dismissed without providing any opportunity of hearing.
  • The issue is squarely covered by Mahaveer Trading Company vs. Deputy Commissioner, State Tax (Writ Tax No. 303 of 2024) and Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. (Writ Tax No. 855 of 2024).

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel did not seriously dispute the factual position regarding the manner in which the hearing notice and reply date were fixed.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court found that both the original order dated 09.05.2024 and the appellate order dated 16.07.2025 were passed without affording any real opportunity of hearing.
  • Relying on Mahaveer Trading Company and Ola Fleet Technologies, the Court quashed both orders and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for a fresh order after granting a proper hearing.
  • The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all defences available in law.

Important Clarification

  • Fixing an identical date for filing a reply and for personal hearing does not satisfy the mandatory hearing requirement under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act; a genuine, sequential opportunity must be given.
  • Notices uploaded only on the portal's “additional” tab, without proper communication, compound the natural-justice defect and justify writ interference despite the availability of appeal.

Sections Involved

  • Section 75(4), CGST Act, 2017 — mandates personal hearing when requested or when an adverse decision is contemplated.
  • Section 107, CGST Act, 2017 — governs appeals before the Appellate Authority.

Decision – In Favour of

Assessee. Both impugned orders were quashed and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after a proper hearing.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Case No.: Writ Tax No. 869 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Bhatia
Date of Order: 02.09.2025

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.