Mandatory pre-decisional hearing under GST law invalidates liability orders passed without affording the taxpayer an opportunity to respond.

Section 75(4) of the WBGST/CGST Act requires an opportunity of hearing before a liability determination where an adverse order is contemplated. The assessment order under Section 73(9) was passed without granting such hearing, and the absence of a reply within the prescribed time did not dispense with the statutory requirement. The order was therefore vulnerable for breach of natural justice and liable to be set aside. Because the adjudication had to be redone after due process, portal access and registration were to be restored for the limited purpose of enabling response to the show-cause proceeding, followed by fresh adjudication after hearing.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the assessment order passed under Section 73(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was vitiated for want of opportunity of hearing in view of Section 75(4) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017; (ii) whether the impugned order should be set aside with a direction for restoration of registration and fresh adjudication after hearing.

Issue (i): whether the assessment order passed under Section 73(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was vitiated for want of opportunity of hearing in view of Section 75(4) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017.

Analysis: Section 75(4) obliges the proper officer to afford an opportunity of hearing before determining liability where an adverse decision is contemplated. The record showed that the impugned order was passed without granting such hearing, and the absence of a response within the prescribed time did not dispense with the statutory requirement of hearing.

Conclusion: The impugned order was vitiated for breach of Section 75(4) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 and was liable to be set aside.

Issue (ii): whether the impugned order should be set aside with a direction for restoration of registration and fresh adjudication after hearing.

Analysis: Since the order was set aside on a procedural ground, the petitioner could not access the portal unless registration was restored for the limited purpose of pursuing the show cause proceeding. The matter therefore required fresh consideration by the proper officer after enabling access and affording an opportunity to respond.

Conclusion: Registration was directed to be restored for the limited purpose of adjudication, and the proceedings were to be decided afresh after hearing the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The assessment order was annulled for violation of the statutory hearing requirement, and the matter was sent back for fresh decision after restoration of portal access and compliance with due process.

Ratio Decidendi: When Section 75(4) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 is attracted, an opportunity of hearing must be afforded before determination of liability, and failure to do so invalidates the adverse order.

---