GST Tax Liability Challenge Rejected: Petitioner's Failure to Respond Leads to Order Upheld Under Section 75(4)

HC dismissed the writ petition challenging GST tax liability order. The court found no violation of personal hearing rights under Section 75(4), as petitioner failed to file a reply or request hearing despite receiving show-cause notice. Recommended filing an appeal with Appellate Authority and seeking delay condonation.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to tax liability under GST Act.
2. Entitlement to personal hearing under Section 75 of GST Act.
3. Comparison with previous judgments regarding personal hearing.
4. Failure to file reply or appear before competent authority.
5. Interpretation of opportunity of hearing under Section 75(4) of GST Act.
6. Requirement of a written request for personal hearing.
7. Dismissal of Writ Petition and advice for appeal.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged a tax liability order under the GST Act issued by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, seeking quashment of the order. The petitioner bypassed the appeal process and approached the court directly, citing a judgment by a Division Bench in a similar case. The petitioner argued for entitlement to a personal hearing based on the previous judgment, which emphasized the importance of personal hearing under Section 75 of the GST Act. However, the respondent contended that the petitioner did not file a reply or appear before the authority, distinguishing this case from the precedent where the petitioner had filed a reply but was not granted a personal hearing. Another judgment from the Allahabad High Court was cited by the petitioner to support their claim. The court considered the arguments and examined the record, noting the petitioner's failure to respond to the show-cause notice or request a personal hearing.

The court highlighted the provisions of Section 75(4) of the GST Act, stating that an opportunity of hearing must be granted upon a written request from the person liable for tax or penalty. The court clarified that even an oral request for a personal hearing should be accepted if made by the person during the proceedings. In this case, since the petitioner chose not to appear or request a hearing after receiving the show-cause notice, the court found the petitioner's claim of denial of hearing to be invalid. The court distinguished this case from the previous judgment where the petitioner had filed a reply but was not given a personal hearing. Consequently, the court dismissed the Writ Petition and advised the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority if desired, along with an application for condonation of delay.

---