Pradipkumar & Co. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court)
Summary: The Bombay High Court, in Pradipkumar & Co. Vs Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (L) No. 33622 of 2026, decided on 4 November 2026, set aside an Order-in-Original dated 25 March 2026 issued in FORM GST DRC-07 on the ground that the petitioner had not been afforded an effective opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner contended that the adjudication order was passed without providing a proper hearing opportunity following issuance of a corrigendum to the show cause notice, resulting in a violation of the principles of natural justice. It was further submitted that the concerned representative could not attend the hearing because of a bereavement in the family and that the non-appearance was neither intentional nor deliberate.
The petitioner sought interference with the adjudication order, relying on the statutory requirements governing personal hearings and adjournments under Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017. The respondents’ counsel fairly agreed that the matter could be remanded in the interest of justice because an opportunity of personal hearing had not been provided. Considering these circumstances, the High Court quashed the order dated 25 March 2026 and directed Respondent No. 2 to adjudicate the proceedings afresh after granting the petitioner a personal hearing. The petitioner was directed to attend the office of Respondent No. 2 on 16 November 2026 at 11:00 a.m., when the further course of adjudication would be determined. Importantly, the High Court expressly clarified that it had made no observations on the merits of the dispute and that all contentions of the parties would remain open.
The Bombay High Court in “Pradipkumar & Co. Versus The Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (L) No. 33622 of 2026 dated 04th November, 2026” held that not granting an effective personal hearing opportunity after issuance of Corrigendum to Show Cause Notice and not considering adjournment for bereavement in the family of authorised representative was violative of principles of natural justice. Accordingly the Order was set aside and case was remanded back for fresh adjudication.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
1. By the present Petition, the Petitioner is seeking relief of quashing and setting aside the Order-in-Original in FORM GST-DRC- 07, dated 25th March, 2026, which is annexed at Exhibit E to the Petition. The case of the Petitioner is that the impugned Order was passed without affording the Petitioner any effective opportunity of personal hearing after issuance of the Corrigendum as constituting compliance under Section 75(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. It is contended that there is a breach of principles of natural justice.
2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that because bereavement in the family, the concerned person could not attend the hearing.
3. He submitted that non-appearance on behalf of the Petitioner was not intentional or deliberate, but for the reasons mentioned above. It is further submitted that on the ground that the opportunity of a personal hearing was not afforded, the impugned Order deserves to be quashed and set aside. He relied upon several judgments in order to support his case that principles of natural justice was required to be followed.
4. Mr. Satyaprakash Sharma, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents fairly submits that as an opportunity of personal hearing was not given, he is agreeable for remanding the matter in the interest of justice. He submits that this is only to ensure that a proper opportunity is given to the Petitioner.
5. In the light of the above, we pass the following Order:-
O R D E R:
(i) Impugned Order-in-Original in FORM GST-DRC- 07, dated 25th March, 2026, which is annexed at Exhibit E to the Petition is quashed and set aside.
(ii) Respondent No.2 to adjudicate the said proceedings a fresh after hearing the Petitioner and giving personal hearing to the Petitioner.
(iii) It is made clear that we have not made any observations on merits of this case and all the contentions of all the parties are kept open.
(iv) The Petitioner shall attend the Office of Respondent No.2 on 16th November, 2026 at 11.00 a.m. on which date the further course of action for decision shall be taken by the Respondent No.2.
(v) The Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
