Regency Hospital Limited Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court addressed a petition filed by Regency Hospital Limited challenging an order dated 15.01.2025 issued by the Additional Commissioner, CGST, Kanpur. This order, passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, created a demand for GST for the tax periods of July 2017 to March 2018 and April 2021 to March 2022, relating to non-payment of GST on the sale of medicines to inpatients and packaged treatments. The hospital argued that it had submitted a reply to the show cause notice on 30.08.2024 and had requested a personal hearing, although the online portal did not facilitate this request. Despite filing a response, the impugned order stated that the hospital had not submitted any reply and had failed to appear for multiple personal hearings. The hospital contended that the hearing notices were sent to an outdated email address, which had been changed and communicated to the authorities, resulting in their inability to attend.
The High Court, after reviewing the submissions and records, found merit in the hospital’s claims. It was undisputed that the hospital had indeed filed a reply to the show cause notice, as evidenced by the acknowledgement receipt. The court noted the discrepancy between this fact and the assertion in the impugned order that no reply was submitted, indicating a clear non-application of mind to the case records. Regarding the personal hearing, the court observed that the hearing notices were sent to an email address that had been officially changed by the hospital and communicated to the respondents. Therefore, the respondents could not claim that the hospital failed to appear despite proper notification. Consequently, the Allahabad High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the order dated 15.01.2025 and the demand raised. The matter was remanded back to the concerned authority with a direction to provide the hospital with a personal hearing and to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law, after considering the hospital’s initial reply. The hospital was directed to appear before the authority within one week with a copy of the court’s order.
