Tax Orders Invalidated: Procedural Defect in Personal Hearing Violates GST Law Section 75(4), Mandating Fair Reconsideration

SC found tax orders invalid due to lack of mandatory personal hearing under Section 75(4) of GST law. Despite respondent's claim of hearing opportunity, court determined procedural requirements were not met. Orders were set aside, matters remanded for reconsideration, and respondent directed to provide petitioner a fair hearing within three months.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner not provided personal hearing in orders and rectification petitions.

Analysis:
The judgment dealt with writ petitions challenging orders and rectification orders due to the lack of a personal hearing for the petitioner. The petitioner, engaged in executing civil work contracts, received a show cause notice which was replied to on specific dates. Orders in original were issued subsequently, and rectification petitions were filed and rejected. The petitioner argued that Section 74 requirements were not met, and their reply was not considered, with no findings recorded. The absence of a personal hearing was highlighted as a violation of Section 75(4) of GST enactments.

The learned counsel for the petitioner emphasized the failure to consider the petitioner's contentions and the absence of a personal hearing, as required by law. On the other hand, the Additional Government Pleader contended that a personal hearing was granted during the disposal of rectification petitions, noting that the petitioner did not request a personal hearing and indicated no preference for it. The court underscored that under Section 75(4) of GST enactments, a personal hearing is mandatory when an adverse order is proposed, regardless of a specific request. Since the tax proposals were confirmed without granting the petitioner a personal hearing, the court deemed the orders unsustainable.

Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matters were remanded for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue fresh orders within three months. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements, particularly regarding personal hearings, in tax matters to ensure fairness and compliance with statutory provisions.

---