Procedural fairness: opportunity to reply and personal hearing required before final GST adjudication; fresh consideration permitted.

Procedural fairness in GST adjudication is central: where a taxpayer did not file a reply or attend a personal hearing due to lack of portal access and oversight, the document treats that absence as grounds for fresh adjudication, requiring an opportunity to file a reply and be heard before any final order. The material also records that any fresh adjudication should remain subject to the unresolved validity of delegated notifications under Section 168A, leaving that legal question open pending higher-court resolution; access to electronic records and time to respond are prescribed as remedial measures.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned adjudication order raising tax and penalties (for the period April 2019 to March 2020) is liable to be set aside and remanded because the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to file a reply or attend personal hearing; and whether relief should be granted pending resolution of challenges to Notifications issued under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The Court examined the factual position that no reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024 and no attendance at the personal hearing fixed by the adjudicating authority had been filed/attended by the petitioner, the explanation being inadvertent oversight and lack of access to the GST portal through the prior consultant. The Court noted precedents and analogous writ petitions where, in similar circumstances, orders passed without affording an opportunity to be heard were set aside and remanded for fresh consideration. The Court considered the ongoing and unresolved question before the Supreme Court regarding the validity of Notifications issued purportedly under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and observed that the validity of those Notifications is left open and any fresh adjudication would be subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings. Balancing these factors, the Court held that procedural fairness required that the petitioner be given an opportunity to file a reply and be heard before any final order on the SCN is rendered.

Conclusion: The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after the petitioner files a reply and is afforded a personal hearing. The petitioner is granted time until 15th December, 2025 to file the reply; access to the GST portal shall be provided within one week; the adjudicating authority shall consider the reply and personal hearing submissions and pass a fresh reasoned order. The question of validity of the impugned notifications under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is left open and any order shall be subject to the outcome of S.L.P No 4240/2025 before the Supreme Court.

---