Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shree Gurukrupa Tradelink Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 31.12.2023 passed by the respondent authorities under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no adequate opportunity of hearing was granted. The show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 was issued on 16.10.2023 fixing the hearing on 06.11.2023. The petitioner filed a reply in Form GST DRC-06 on 06.11.2023. However, without fixing any further date for personal hearing, the respondent passed the impugned order on 31.12.2023. The Court observed that the Rojnama recording the proceedings indicated that the petitioner was granted only one opportunity of hearing. The Court held that the petitioner was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard as mandated under Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the respondent authority for fresh adjudication after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent on 21.04.2026 and cooperate in the proceedings. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Natural Justice - Adequate Opportunity of Hearing - Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - The petitioner was issued a show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 on 16.10.2023 fixing hearing on 06.11.2023. The petitioner replied via Form GST DRC-06 on 06.11.2023. However, the impugned order was passed on 31.12.2023 without granting any further opportunity of personal hearing. The Court held that the petitioner was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard as required under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the order was quashed and set aside. (Paras 4-6)
B) Goods and Services Tax - Ex-Parte Order - Violation of Natural Justice - Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - The Court found that the respondent authority did not fix any date for personal hearing after the petitioner's reply, and the order was passed without hearing the petitioner. The Court held that the principles of natural justice were violated and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned order dated 31.12.2023 passed under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is vitiated for want of adequate opportunity of hearing in violation of Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 31.12.2023 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the respondent authority for fresh adjudication after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 21.04.2026. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Adequate opportunity of hearing
- Section 75(4) CGST Act
- 2017
- Violation of principles of natural justice
- Quashing of ex-parte order
Case Details
R/Special Civil Application No. 6483 of 2024
Honourable Mr. Justice A.S. Supehia, Honourable Mr. Justice Pranav Trivedi
Mr. Ashutosh S. Dave for the Petitioner, Ms. Pooja Ashar, Assistant Government Pleader for the Respondent No. 1
Shree Gurukrupa Tradelink Private Limited
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order passed under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the impugned order dated 31.12.2023 and remand for fresh adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of hearing.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was not granted adequate opportunity of hearing before passing the ex-parte order, violating principles of natural justice.
Previous Decisions
The Court on 13.03.2026 had noted that the petitioner was afforded opportunities but had chosen not to remain present, and an incorrect statement was made in the writ petition. However, upon perusal of documents, the Court found only one opportunity was granted.
Issues
Whether the impugned order dated 31.12.2023 was passed in violation of principles of natural justice for want of adequate opportunity of hearing?
Whether the petitioner was afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard as required under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that no adequate opportunity of hearing was granted before passing the impugned order.
The respondent (AGP) submitted that the show-cause notice was issued on 16.10.2023 fixing hearing on 06.11.2023, and the petitioner replied on 06.11.2023, but the order was passed on 31.12.2023 without further hearing.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the petitioner was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard as required under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. The show-cause notice fixed only one date for hearing, and after the petitioner's reply, no further opportunity of personal hearing was granted before passing the ex-parte order. Therefore, the impugned order was vitiated for violation of principles of natural justice and was liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
On perusal of the documents which were provided before this Court, i.e. the Rojnama recording the proceedings, we find that the petitioner has been granted the opportunity of hearing for one time only.
Thus, the petitioner was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard as required under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017.
In light of the above, the impugned order dated 31.12.2023 is quashed and set aside.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 31.12.2023. On 13.03.2026, the Court noted that the petitioner had been afforded opportunities but had chosen not to remain present, and an incorrect statement was made in the petition. However, the Court kept the matter for 18.03.2026 to give one more chance. On 18.03.2026, after perusing the documents, the Court found that only one opportunity of hearing was granted, and the impugned order was passed without further hearing. The Court quashed the order and remanded the matter.
Acts & Sections
- Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017: Section 75(4)
- Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017:
