Pooja Exports Vs State of Punjab And Anr. (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Summary: The petitioner, M/s Pooja Exports, challenged the order dated 18.05.2026 (Annexure P-2), restricting the challenge before the High Court to the ground that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice because no opportunity of personal hearing had been afforded before passing the impugned order.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, although the writ petition raised various issues, the challenge was confined to the denial of personal hearing. The learned counsel for the Revenue fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing had been afforded to the petitioner before the impugned order was passed and stated that fresh orders would be passed after affording the petitioner due opportunity of hearing.
The Court referred to Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, which provides that an opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.
The Court further noted that a similar issue had arisen before the Division Bench in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP-33977-2025, decided on 24.03.2026. In that case, the Division Bench had accepted the petition and set aside the adjudication/assessment order, while granting liberty to the Revenue to proceed against the petitioner only after following the provisions of law, including Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act.
Following that decision, the present petition was also disposed of in terms of Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. Thus, the order under challenge did not stand as the final adjudication of the underlying matter; the Revenue was to pass fresh orders after affording the petitioner the due opportunity of hearing, as acknowledged before the Court.
All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, were also disposed of.
Cases Discussed
- Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP-33977-2025 (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
— followed in relation to the requirement of affording an opportunity of hearing under Section 75(4) before proceeding against an assessee and the setting aside of the impugned adjudication/assessment order with liberty to the Revenue to proceed in accordance with law.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, though the writ petition raises various issues, he confines the challenge only to the order dated 18.05.2026 (Annexure P-2) primarily on the ground that the same has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, as an opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded to the petitioner before passing the order impugned.
2. Learned counsel for the revenue fairly admits that opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded to the petitioner before passing the order impugned, and that fresh orders would be passed in the matter, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
3. Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, provides that an opportunity of hearing shall be granted where any adverse decision is contemplated against an assessee. Section 75(4) of the Act, reads as under:-
“Section 75(4) in The Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017:
(4)An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.”
4. Similar issue also came up for adjudication before the Division Bench of this Court in Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP-33977-2025, decided on 24.03.2026, wherein, the Division Bench held as under:-
“10. In the light of the above discussion, the present petition is accepted, resulting in the setting aside of the impugned adjudication/assessment order dated 23.08.2024 (Annexure P-1). However, liberty is granted to the respondent-revenue to proceed against the petitioner but only after following the provisions of law including Section 75(4) of the 2017 Act.
5. In that view of the matter, the present petition also stands disposed of in terms of Kemexel Ecommerce Pvt. Ltd. (supra).
6. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
