TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1600
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p for final hearing on one of the contentions noticed by this Court in its order dated 29.04.2026. Since the order dated 29.04.2026 is a detailed order containing the relevant facts, the prayers made in the writ application and the pleadings available on the record, it would be appropriate to extract the entire order dated 29.04.2026 hereunder for a ready reference:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the CGST. 2. The petitioner in this writ application has been seeking the following reliefs: "(i) The show cause notice dated 18.06.2025 (as contained in Annexure- P 2 series) issued by the respondent no. 3 for the Tax Period 2018-19 to 2022-23 under Section 74 of the Central Goods and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arch 2023 under Section 74 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'CGST Act, 2017'). It is his submission that pursuant to the said SCN (Annexure-'P/2' series) before passing the final order (Annexure-'P/3') dated 07.10.2025, the respondents were obliged to give opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. In paragraph-14 of the writ application, the petitioner has made the following statements: "That the petitioner states that the Respondent no. 2 before reaching the adverse decision did not issue any notice to the petitioner for providing opportunity of hearing in terms of the statutory provisions mandated in sub Section 4 of Section 75 of the Act. In the matter of TATA projects limited....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order. He has relied upon a decision of the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Tata Projects Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors. passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7830 of 2024 (Annexure 'P/7'). It is his submission that the personal hearing given to the representative of the petitioner, as stated in paragraph '2' of the impugned order, is not a compliance with the mandate of Sub-section (4) of Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017. 6. We are, however, not persuaded to accept the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. It is evident from the records that the SCN (Annexure- 'P/2') has been issued under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Under the scheme of Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, the proper officer has to dete....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....njoint reading of Section 74 and Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017 that after service of SCN and on receipt of the representation from the person chargeable with tax, if the Assessing Authority contemplates passing an adverse order then an opportunity of personal hearing is to be given. In the present case, this procedure has been followed by the Assessing Authority inasmuch as after receipt of the response of the petitioner, the Assessing Authority granted three opportunities of personal hearing on 10.07.2025, 18.07.2025 and 28.07.2025 to the tax-payer. Sri Ibrahim J Gadly, Chartered Accountant an authorized representative of the tax-payer appeared in personal hearing on 28.07.2025 and made a submission that the defence reply in written is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riate stage. 11. A second submission has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner saying that even if the impugned order (Annexure- 'P/3') is not interfered with, the respondents' action in realizing the amount under the impugned order (Annexure- 'P/3') within 1 ½ month from the date of the impugned order cannot be justified. It is submitted that the appellant had an opportunity to prefer an appeal within a period of three months under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. In his submission, the judicial pronouncements are there on the subject governing this issue where under it has been held that the taxing authority would not be justified in taking coercive means to recover the amount before expiry of the statutory....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he impugned order (Annexure- '3') but within a period of twenty days thereafter. In this regard, learned counsel submits that the Appellate Authority has been conferred with power under sub-Section (4) of Section 107 of the CGST/BGST Act to condone a delay up to a further period of one month on showing sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the period of three months. 6. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the CGST and CX submits that vide order dated 29.04.2025, this Court has decided one of the issues raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. Since the said order on that aspect of the matter has attained finality, it would not be left open for the petitioner to agitate the same and one issue before the Appellate Auth....