Facts of the Case

Gangotri Engineers, through its proprietor Rajeev Pandey, challenged an ex-parte order passed under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017 in Form GST DRC-07 dated 15.02.2025 for FY 2020-21, raising a demand of Rs. 28,79,278.85/- including interest and penalty, and the subsequent appellate order dated 29.09.2025 dismissing its appeal as time-barred. Records showed a show cause notice was issued on 14.11.2024, with reply due by 13.12.2024 and personal hearing fixed for 20.12.2024. The petitioner did not appear pursuant to that notice, and the order was eventually passed on 15.02.2025 — a date for which no further notice of hearing had ever been given.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an adjudication order passed on a date for which no notice of personal hearing was ever issued to the assessee violates the principles of natural justice, rendering it non est.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No physical or oral hearing was afforded, and adverse material was not confronted before passing the demand order, resulting in an unfair trial.
  • The appellate order dismissing the appeal on limitation should also be set aside, and the appeal pre-deposit refunded.

Respondent's Arguments

  • No specific rebuttal was pressed by the department once the timeline discrepancy — original hearing fixed for 20.12.2024 but order passed on 15.02.2025 without any further notice — was noted by the Court.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted that although a hearing was originally fixed for 20.12.2024 (which the petitioner did not attend), no further notice was given to the petitioner regarding the hearing that actually took place on 15.02.2025, the date on which the impugned order was passed.
  • Following the Coordinate Bench's decision in M/s Shubham Steel Traders vs. State of U.P., the Court held the original order under Section 73 was passed in violation of the principle of natural justice and, accordingly, non est in law.
  • Both the original order dated 15.02.2025 and the appellate order dated 29.09.2025 dismissing the appeal on limitation were quashed and set aside, with a direction to grant the petitioner another opportunity of hearing before passing a fresh order.

Important Clarification

  • Where an order under Section 73 is ultimately passed on a date materially different from the hearing date originally notified, without any fresh notice for the date on which the order is actually passed, the order is liable to be treated as non est for violation of natural justice — irrespective of the assessee's earlier non-appearance.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, CGST/SGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not paid or short paid other than by fraud.
  • Section 107, CGST/SGST Act, 2017 — appeal to the appellate authority.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ petition was allowed in favour of the Assessee, with both the demand and the appellate dismissal quashed and the matter remanded for a fresh, properly notified hearing.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Case No.: WRIT TAX No. 1175 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf, J. and Hon'ble Prashant Kumar, J.
Date of Order: 14.11.2025

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.