Mandatory personal hearing under GST cannot be skipped before adverse adjudication; order set aside and remitted.

An adverse GST adjudication could not be sustained where the taxpayer was given notice to reply but was not afforded the separate personal hearing required before final decision. The statutory scheme under the Uttar Pradesh GST Act required both a written reply opportunity and an oral hearing, and the record showed that no date, time, or venue for hearing was proposed. That procedural defect was treated as mandatory and going to the root of the adjudication. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication after granting the taxpayer an opportunity to file a reply and be heard.

---

---

Issues: Whether an adverse order under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be sustained when the petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing as mandated before final adjudication.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required both an opportunity to file a written reply and a separate opportunity of oral hearing before an adverse decision was taken. The notice under Section 73(1) called for a reply, but the record showed that no date, time, or venue for personal hearing was proposed and the column was marked not applicable. On that admitted position, the petitioner was never given the hearing required by Section 75(4). The defect was treated as a mandatory procedural lapse going to the root of the adjudication.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after granting the petitioner an opportunity to file its reply and be heard.

---