2025-VIL-721-MP

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Section 74(9), Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 - Principles of Natural Justice; Audi Alteram Partem; Opportunity of Hearing – Issue of DRC-01 proposing additional tax liability - Petitioner submitted a detailed reply and made a specific written request for a personal hearing as provided for under the Act. However, the authority proceeded to pass a final assessment order under Section 74(9), confirming the demand and penalty without granting the requested personal hearing - Whether an assessment order passed under Section 74(9) of the CGST Act, 2017, is legally sustainable if it is passed without affording a mandatory personal hearing as stipulated under Section 75(4) of the said Act, especially when a specific written request for a hearing has been made and an adverse decision is contemplated – HELD - The impugned assessment order was passed in clear violation of the mandatory provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act and the principles of natural justice. A plain reading of Section 75(4) makes it unequivocally clear that an opportunity of hearing is mandatory where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person. The use of the word "or" signifies that these are two independent conditions, and the fulfillment of either one makes the grant of a hearing obligatory - In the instant case, both conditions were satisfied, as the petitioner had made a specific request in writing for a personal hearing, and an adverse order was manifestly contemplated and subsequently passed – Further, the term "opportunity of hearing" includes the right to a "personal hearing" and cannot be construed as being fulfilled by merely permitting the submission of a written reply. The failure of the adjudicating authority to grant a personal hearing despite a written request constitutes an apparent error of law and a breach of the legal maxim Audi Alteram Partem. This procedural lapse is not a mere technicality but a fatal flaw that vitiates the entire decision-making process and renders the resultant order unsustainable - The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority with a direction to pass a fresh order after affording a proper opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner in accordance with the law - The writ petitions are allowed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page