Personal Hearing Rights Upheld: GST Act Section 75(4) Demands Fair Process and Timely Reasoned Decisions for Taxpayers

SC ruled that failure to provide personal hearing under Section 75(4) of UP GST Act, 2017 violates principles of natural justice. The court quashed previous tax orders and directed respondent to grant petitioner opportunity for hearing, mandating a reasoned order within six weeks while cautioning against unnecessary adjournments.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issue involves the petitioner being aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade 2, (Appeals), Judicial Division, State Tax, Mainpuri for not affording an opportunity of personal hearing as mandated under Section 75(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Summary:

Opportunity of Personal Hearing:
The Court emphasized the mandatory requirement of providing an opportunity of personal hearing as per Section 75(4) of the Act. The word "or" in the section indicates two distinct scenarios where personal hearing must be given: either upon application by the individual subject to penalty or tax imposition, or in the event of contemplation of an adverse order. Personal hearing is crucial for procedural fairness and natural justice, allowing individuals to present their case, respond to allegations, and address concerns directly to the decision-maker. It acts as a safeguard against arbitrary decisions. The Court referred to previous judgments to support the necessity of affording a personal hearing before passing orders.

Judgment:
In consideration of the above, a writ of certiorari was issued against the orders dated July 12, 2023, and August 18, 2022. These orders were quashed, and consequential relief was directed to follow. The respondent No. 3 was instructed to grant the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and subsequently pass a reasoned order within six weeks. The petitioner was cautioned against seeking adjournments, with the respondent having the liberty to proceed in accordance with the law if adjournments were requested. The writ petition was allowed accordingly.

---