Highway Furniture Industries Vs State of Punjab And Others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court considered a petition challenging the show cause notice dated 05.06.2025 and order dated 24.07.2025 passed under Section 74 of the Punjab/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner primarily contended that Section 74 had been erroneously invoked because the assessment concerned the period 2024-2025, which, according to the petitioner, did not fall within the ambit of Section 74. It was also submitted that these objections had not been appropriately considered and that a reasonable opportunity of hearing had been denied. The respondents-revenue, instead of contesting the matter further, stated that the case could be remitted to the concerned authority for a fresh order in accordance with law after providing the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing. Accepting this position, the High Court remitted the matter to the concerned authority. The Court set aside the impugned order dated 24.07.2025 and permitted the respondents to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after affording the petitioner a personal hearing. The Court further directed that all legal and factual issues would remain open for consideration before the concerned authority. The petition was accordingly disposed of, along with any pending applications.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. This petition seeks to challenge show cause notice dated 05.06.2025 (Annexure P-4) as well as order dated 24.07.2025 (Annexure P-6), passed by respondent No.3 under Section 74 of the Punjab/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2017”).
2. The challenge is primarily on the ground that the jurisdiction to invoke Section 74 of the Act of 2017 has been erroneously exercised, inasmuch as the assessment pertains to the period 2024-2025, which does not fall within the ambit of Section 74 of the Act of 2017. It is contended that such objections taken by the petitioner has not been appropriately considered by the respondents. The petitioner also states that reasonable opportunity of hearing has also been denied to it.
3. Faced with the aforementioned submissions, learned counsel for the respondents-revenue states that instead of keeping this matter pending, the same can be remitted to the concerned authority to pass order afresh in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
4. In view of the fair stand taken by learned counsel for the respondents-revenue, this matter is remitted back to the authority concerned. Accordingly, impugned order dated 24.07.2025 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.3, is set aside and the respondents shall be at liberty to pass order afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. It is further provided that all legal and factual issues shall remain open for consideration before the authority concerned.
5. Petition stands disposed of,
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
