The Allahabad High Court addressed the case of M/s Mahesh Fashion versus the State of U.P., where ex parte GST orders were challenged due to procedural irregularities. The petitioner, a proprietorship firm, contested two orders: one passed on August 24, 2024, and an appellate order on April 9, 2025. The issue arose from a show cause notice under Section 73, to which the petitioner responded. However, an ex parte order was issued on a date not scheduled for a hearing, and it was misclassified under “additional notices” instead of “orders,” resulting in non-communication to the petitioner. The subsequent appeal was dismissed under similar circumstances, without proper notification.
The court examined whether such ex parte orders, issued without appropriate notice and misfiled, were legally sustainable. It emphasized the necessity of adhering to the principles of natural justice in GST proceedings, noting that issuing an order on an unnotified date constitutes a denial of a fair hearing. The court ruled that orders must be issued on the scheduled hearing date or another date with proper notification to the assessee. Moreover, incorrect categorization in the portal, which affects communication, invalidates the service of orders.
Consequently, the appellate order from April 9, 2025, was quashed as unsustainable. The court remanded the case for fresh consideration by the appellate authority, mandating a strict adherence to legal procedures and ensuring the petitioner receives a fair hearing. A three-month timeline was set for resolving the matter. This decision underscores the importance of procedural integrity in legal adjudications.
Order date: 15 Sept 2025
Parties: M/s Mahesh Fashion v. State of U.P.
Facts -
- Petitioner, a proprietorship firm, challenged orders dated 24.08.2024 (ex parte) and 09.04.2025 (appeal rejected). Show cause notice issued under Section 73; reply filed on 17.08.2024; hearing fixed for 20.08.2024.
- However, order passed ex parte on 24.08.2024, on a date not fixed for hearing, without giving fresh notice. The order was wrongly uploaded under “additional notices” tab instead of “orders”, causing non-communication to petitioner.
- First appeal was also dismissed ex parte, with appellate order passed on 09.04.2025 without proper intimation. Petitioner relied on Videocon D2h Ltd., Wonder Enterprises, and Dilip Kumar Gupta to argue violation of natural justice.
Issue -
- Whether an ex parte order passed on a date not fixed for hearing and uploaded under wrong head, without proper notice or communication, is sustainable in law?
Order -
- The Court emphasized that principles of natural justice must be strictly followed in GST adjudication. Passing an ex parte order on a date not notified to the assessee amounts to denial of fair hearing.
- It held that orders must be passed either on the date fixed for hearing or on a subsequent date with due notice to the assessee; otherwise, they are invalid. Uploading orders under incorrect portal categories (like “additional notices”) deprives the assessee of effective communication and cannot be treated as valid service.
- The impugned appellate order dated 09.04.2025 was quashed as unsustainable. The matter was remanded to the appellate authority to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. A timeline of three months was fixed for disposal.
