Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

GST Hearing u/s 75(4) must be Fixed after Submission of Reply: Uttarakhand HC Remands Matter for Fresh Adjudication [Read Order]

The Court noted that the essence of a personal hearing lies in allowing the taxpayer to supplement or explain their written reply before an adverse decision is made. If the hearing is conducted prematurely, it deprives the assessee of a meaningful opportunity to defend their case

GST Hearing u/s 75(4) must be Fixed after Submission of Reply: Uttarakhand HC Remands Matter for Fresh Adjudication [Read Order]
X

The Uttarakhand High Court has reiterated that under Section 75(4) of the Goods and Services Tax Act ( GST ), 2017, the opportunity of personal hearing must be provided after the assessee submits their reply to the show-cause notice. A writ petition was filed by M/s Monolith Resorts Private Limited against the Commissioner, State Tax, Uttarakhand, challenging an assessment...


The Uttarakhand High Court has reiterated that under Section 75(4) of the Goods and Services Tax Act ( GST ), 2017, the opportunity of personal hearing must be provided after the assessee submits their reply to the show-cause notice.

A writ petition was filed by M/s Monolith Resorts Private Limited against the Commissioner, State Tax, Uttarakhand, challenging an assessment order passed without providing a fair opportunity of hearing.

Before the court, counsel for the petitioner relied on an earlier judgment of the same Bench in M/s Modine Thermal Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Uttarakhand, decided on April 21, 2025, where the Court had examined an identical issue concerning the improper scheduling of a personal hearing before the due date for reply submission.

The Definitive GST Guide for Today’s Tax Landscape - Click Here

In the earlier decision the court observed that the Revenue Authority’s action of fixing a hearing before the last date for reply submission was akin to “putting the cart before the horse.”

The Court noted that the essence of a personal hearing lies in allowing the taxpayer to supplement or explain their written reply before an adverse decision is made. If the hearing is conducted prematurely, it deprives the assessee of a meaningful opportunity to defend their case.

The earlier decision of the court cited the principle that when a statute prescribes a particular manner of doing an act, it must be done in that manner alone, holding that the assessment order passed in violation of this procedure could not be sustained.

As in the Modine Thermal Systems case, the Chief Justice G. Narendar set aside the assessment and directed the authority to recommence proceedings from the stage of issuance of notice. Accordingly, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

M/s Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs The Commissioner, State Tax , 2025 TAXSCAN (HC) 2201 , WRIT PETITION (M/B) No. 789 OF 2025 , 16 October 2025 , Tarun Pande , Puja Banga
M/s Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs The Commissioner, State Tax
CITATION :  2025 TAXSCAN (HC) 2201Case Number :  WRIT PETITION (M/B) No. 789 OF 2025Date of Judgement :  16 October 2025Coram :  JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR and JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAYCounsel of Appellant :  Tarun PandeCounsel Of Respondent :  Puja Banga
Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019