https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773755 An adjudication order under the Uttar Pradesh GST law was held unsustainable because it did not set out the relevant facts or the basis of decision, instead merely referring to the show cause notice and recording non-response. The HC noted that Section 75(6) requires the proper officer to state the relevant facts and the basis of the decision, and that a final order must be self-contained. Mere reproduction of the notice, even without a reply, does not satisfy that requirement. The order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after opportunity of reply and hearing. en-us Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jun 2025 08:37:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773755 An adjudication order under the Uttar Pradesh GST law was held unsustainable because it did not set out the relevant facts or the basis of decision, instead merely referring to the show cause notice and recording non-response. The HC noted that Section 75(6) requires the proper officer to state the relevant facts and the basis of the decision, and that a final order must be self-contained. Mere reproduction of the notice, even without a reply, does not satisfy that requirement. The order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after opportunity of reply and hearing. Case-Laws GST Wed, 25 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773755