AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
9 paragraphs · 237 wordsManoj Kumar Gupta CJ
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner-firm has assailed the order dated 16.08.2024 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/ UKGST Act, 2017, in respect of Financial Year 2019-20. The sole submission of learned counsel for the petitioner-firm is that, in the show-cause notice issued to the petitioner-firm dated 20.05.2024, no date of personal hearing was fixed, although it is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the Act.
Learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/ Revenue Department submits that there is delay in filing the present Writ Petition, inasmuch as, the order impugned was passed on 16.08.2024.
Since it is not being disputed that, in the show- cause notice, no date for personal hearing was fixed, nor the same was provided to the petitioner-firm at any stage before passing the impugned order, therefore, there is clear violation of the requirement of Section 75(4) of the Act, which vitiates the order.
As principles of natural justice have been violated, therefore, we overrule the objection regarding slight delay on part of the petitioner-firm in approaching the Court.
The order dated 16.08.2024 is, accordingly, quashed, leaving it open to respondent no. 2 to pass a fresh order, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner firm, strictly in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.