Facts of the Case

M/s Nova Enterprises, through its proprietor Sushila Jaiswal, challenged an assessment order dated 16.04.2024 passed under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017, as well as the subsequent appellate order dated 12.09.2025 which had dismissed its first appeal as time-barred. The petitioner's grievance was that no genuine opportunity of personal hearing was afforded before the demand was raised. On instructions, the Standing Counsel for the State conceded that the show-cause notice itself had fixed an earlier date for personal hearing than the date fixed for filing the reply — an internal inconsistency that effectively denied the petitioner a meaningful hearing before the adverse order was passed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an order passed under Section 73 can be sustained where the show-cause notice fixes the personal hearing date before the date fixed for filing the reply, thereby depriving the assessee of an effective hearing.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No opportunity of hearing was in substance granted before the Section 73 order was passed.
  • The identical issue of a hearing date preceding the reply date had already been decided in the assessee's favour by a coordinate Bench in Mahaveer Trading Company v. Deputy Commissioner, State Tax.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel, on instructions, did not dispute the factual position that the show-cause notice fixed a prior date for personal hearing than the date fixed for filing the reply.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court accepted the sole ground urged, holding it squarely covered by Mahaveer Trading Company.
  • Both the original order dated 16.04.2024 and the limitation-based appellate order dated 12.09.2025 were quashed.
  • The matter was remanded to the assessing authority to pass a fresh order only after granting the petitioner a genuine opportunity of hearing.

Important Clarification

  • A show-cause notice that fixes the personal hearing date earlier than the date fixed for filing the reply defeats the very purpose of the hearing and renders the resultant order vulnerable on natural justice grounds.
  • Where such a sequencing defect is shown, courts have been willing to bypass the limitation bar on the appeal and grant relief directly in writ jurisdiction.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not paid/short paid for reasons other than fraud.
  • Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 — mandates an opportunity of personal hearing before any adverse order.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the Assessee — both impugned orders were quashed and the matter remanded for a fresh order after proper hearing.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench — Case No.: Writ Tax No. 971 of 2025 — Coram: Hon'ble Justice Pankaj Bhatia — Date of Order: 22 September 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.