A.G. And Sons HUF Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)
GST Order Passed by Successor Officer Without Granting Fresh Hearing Violates Principles of Natural Justice; Delhi High Court Sets Aside GST Adjudication Due to Violation of Natural Justice; No Valid GST Order If Hearing Conducted by One Officer and Decision Given by Another: Delhi HC; GST Demand Order Invalid Because Assessee Was Not Heard by Adjudicating Officer; Alternate Remedy No Bar When GST Order Violates Natural Justice, Rules Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court set aside a GST adjudication order after finding that the final order was passed by a successor Additional Commissioner who had not personally heard the assessee, while the hearing had been conducted by his predecessor. The Court held that such a procedure violates the principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution because “one who hears must decide.” The petitioner challenged the order on grounds including denial of fresh hearing, non-supply of relied-upon documents, absence of cross-examination opportunity, and lack of jurisdiction under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act. Rejecting the Revenue’s objection regarding alternate remedy, the Court ruled that writ jurisdiction can be exercised where natural justice is breached. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication and directed the petitioner to appear before the Additional Commissioner with written submissions, while also directing authorities to consider requests for relevant documents sensitively.
