Procedural fairness in GST assessment requires proper service of hearing notice and opportunity of hearing before adverse orders are made.

An assessment order under Section 73 could not be sustained where the hearing notice was not effectively served and the petitioner was denied an opportunity of hearing. The court noted that the petitioner had ceased to hold U.P. GST registration before the impugned order was passed, and the record did not show receipt of notice or participation in the proceedings. The procedural lapse required reconsideration, so the order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh hearing, proper service of notice, and a reasoned order in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment order passed under Section 73 without proper service of hearing notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner could be sustained, and whether the matter required fresh adjudication after notice and hearing.

Analysis: The notice had been issued when the petitioner was registered under the GST regime, but by the time the impugned order was passed the petitioner was no longer holding U.P. GST registration. The record also showed that the petitioner did not receive notice of hearing and, therefore, did not participate before the impugned order was made. In these circumstances, the authority ought to have served the order and hearing notice properly, including by email or registered post, before proceeding further. The absence of effective notice and hearing amounted to a procedural infirmity requiring the matter to be reconsidered after granting an opportunity of hearing and passing a reasoned order in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The impugned order could not be sustained and was set aside, with a direction to grant a fresh hearing and pass a reasoned order thereafter.

---