M/S Kisan Sewa Kendra Thru. Proprietor Shilpi Singh… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2026)

M/S Kisan Sewa Kendra Thru. Proprietor Shilpi Singh… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions: adjudication order dated 07.12.2023 set aside; petitioner to treat the impugned order as the final notice and submit a further reply within three weeks (jurisdictional and merit issues open); adjudicating authority to fix a personal hearing with at least 15 days' notice; petitioner undertakes to appear; reasoned order to be passed thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether the adjudication order dated 07.12.2023 under Section 73(9) of the U.P. G.S.T Act, 2017 violated the rules of natural justice by denying the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing, the hearing date being the same as the date fixed for filing of reply. +1 more

Court's answer

Denial of adequate opportunity to present the case (personal hearing fixed on the same date as the reply deadline) offends well-established rules of natural justice, and absent notice of the proposed demand and adequate opportunity the resulting adjudication order remains procedurally defective.

Ratio / Principle

As the facts were not in dispute, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending, calling for a counter affidavit, or relegating the petitioner to the forum of appeal.

Key takeaways

The adjudication order dated 07.12.2023 is set aside; the petitioner may treat the impugned order as the final notice, submit a further reply within three weeks raising all jurisdictional and merit issues, and appear at a personal hearing to be fixed with at least 15 days' notice, after which a reasoned order is to be passed.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Writ Tax No. 428 of 2026 (decided March 19, 2026; Bench: Shekhar B. Saraf & Manjive Shukla): Challenge to adjudication order dated 07.12.2023 passed under Section 73(9) of the U.P. G.S.T Act, 2017 for tax period 2017-18, on the ground of breach of natural justice — the date fixed for personal hearing was the same as the date fixed for filing the reply, leaving no adequate opportunity to present the case. With the facts undisputed, the Court found no useful purpose in keeping the petition pending, calling for a counter affidavit, or relegating the petitioner to appeal, holding that without notice of the proposed demand and adequate opportunity the order remains procedurally defective. The writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the order, directing the petitioner to treat it as the final notice, submit a further reply within three weeks raising all jurisdictional and merit issues, and appear at a personal hearing to be fixed with at least 15 days' notice, whereafter a reasoned order is to be passed. Counsel had relied on Writ Tax No. 303 of 2024 (Mahaveer Trading Company Vs. Deputy Commissioner State Tax and Another).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

WRIT TAX No. - 428 of 2026

M/S Kisan Sewa Kendra Thru. Proprietor Shilpi Singh

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. And 2 Others

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Utkarsh Misra, Abhishek Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 3

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

Heard Shri Utkarsh Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay Sarin, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

Challenge has been raised to the adjudication order dated 07.12.2023 passed under Section 73(9) of the U.P. G.S.T Act, 2017 for the tax period 2017-18.

It has been submitted, the essential requirements of rules of natural justice have been violated inasmuch as the petitioner was not given reasonable opportunity of personal hearing. The date fixed for personal hearing was the same as the date fixed for filing of reply. In that regard reliance has been placed on Writ Tax No.303 of 2024, Mahaveer Trading Company Vs. Deputy Commissioner State Tax and Another.

The above facts are not in dispute. Therefore, no useful purpose may be served either in keeping the present petition or calling for a counter affidavit or relegating the petitioner to the forum of appeal. The rules of natural justice are far too well established to allow any exception to be made in that regard. Unless, the petitioner had been put to notice with respect to the demand proposed to be created by the adjudication order and unless he had been given adequate opportunity to present his case, the order that may arise may remain procedurally defective.

WTAX No. 428 of 2026

2

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The order dated 07.12.2023 is set aside.

(ii) The petitioner may treat the impugned order as the final notice.

(iii) It may submit its further reply thereto within a period of three weeks. In that regard, it may remain open to the petitioner to raise all jurisdictional and merit issues. Subject to such compliance made, the adjudicating authority may fix a date for personal hearing with at least 15 days notice to allow the petitioner to be prepared on all counts. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the adjudicating authority on the dates that may be fixed. Accordingly, appropriate reasoned order may be passed thereafter.

(Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

March 19, 2026

Ashutosh

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench