Case Details
Case Title: M/S Nareena Lifesciences Private Limited v. State of U.P. and Another
Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 3
Petition No.: Writ Tax No. 3238 of 2025
Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC:118270-DB
Date of Judgement: 21.07.2025
Category of Dispute: Principles of Natural Justice – GST Adjudication (Section 73 proceedings)
Relevant Sections: Section 73 of CGST/UPGST Act, 2017; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Facts of the Case (Paras 1–2)
M/s Nareena Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. challenged a demand order and show cause notice issued under Section 73 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017 by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Gautam Buddha Nagar. The petitioner argued that despite submitting a reply and specifically requesting a personal hearing, the adjudicating authority passed the order without granting such hearing. The prayers included quashing of the order dated 25.08.2024 (Form GST DRC-07) and the show cause notice dated 21.05.2024 (Form GST DRC-01), along with protection against coercive recovery.
Questions/Dispute (Paras 2–3)
The key issue before the Court was whether passing a demand order under Section 73 without granting personal hearing, despite a specific request, amounted to a violation of principles of natural justice and thus rendered the adjudication void.
Observations of the Court (Paras 2–4)
The Court noted that the petitioner had indeed filed a reply to the show cause notice and had sought personal hearing, yet no hearing was provided. This amounted to a clear breach of natural justice since Section 75(4) of the CGST Act requires that opportunity of personal hearing must be given if sought. The Court emphasized that adjudication without oral hearing, particularly where rights and liabilities are determined, undermines fairness and due process.
Judgement (Paras 4–5)
The Allahabad High Court set aside the impugned order and notice issued under Section 73. It directed the concerned authority to grant a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order within eight weeks. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.
Cases Referred
| Case | Court | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| No external case laws specifically cited in this judgment | – | – |
Between Fine Lines (Practical Takeaway)
This ruling reinforces that GST demand orders passed without granting a personal hearing, especially when expressly requested, are unsustainable. Taxpayers should always insist on personal hearings in adjudication, and authorities are bound to comply, failing which their orders can be struck down for violating natural justice.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
