Laskin Engineering Pvt Ltd Vs State of U.P. and Another (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court addressed a petition filed by Laskin Engineering Pvt Ltd challenging an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Sikandrabad, Bulandshahar, under Section 74(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The primary contention raised by the petitioner was the denial of a mandatory personal hearing before the issuance of the adverse order. While the Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents initially raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of an appeal under Section 107 of the Act, the petitioner’s counsel countered this by highlighting the violation of Section 75(4) of the same Act, which mandates an opportunity for a personal hearing when requested or when an adverse decision is contemplated.
The court found it unacceptable that the revenue authorities were seemingly disregarding this fundamental procedural requirement, even with changes in substantive law. The record indicated that the adjudicating authority neither issued a notice for oral hearing nor granted any personal hearing to Laskin Engineering. In response to the court’s query, the Additional Chief Standing Counsel acknowledged similar instances in other litigations and informed the court about an Office Memo issued by the Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Uttar Pradesh, dated November 12, 2024. This memo addressed irregularities such as the absence of hearing dates and times in orders and hearing dates being set before the date for submitting a reply to the show-cause notice, emphasizing the need for personal hearings before passing adverse orders. The court firmly stated that denying a personal hearing before an adverse order is passed in adjudication proceedings is unsustainable and a gross violation of natural justice. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner to pass a fresh order after providing the petitioner with a due opportunity for a hearing. While considering imposing costs on the respondent, the court accepted the assurance that such violations would not be repeated and directed the Commissioner to implement remedial measures and consider disciplinary actions against officials violating principles of natural justice without valid reasons.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
