Case Details: Regency Hospital Ltd. v. Union of India - [2025] 172 taxmann.com 755 (Allahabad)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Arun Bhansali, CJ. & Kshitij Shailendra, J.
-
Atul Gupta, for the Petitioner.
-
Gaurav Mahajan and Saumitra Singh for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
A SCN under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, was issued to the petitioner for the non-payment of GST on the sale of medicines to inpatients and packaged treatment. The hospital filed its reply to the SCN and requested a personal hearing. However, the portal did not accept the request for the hearing. Despite this, an order was passed, stating that no response had been filed and that no one appeared for the hearing, even though multiple reminders were allegedly sent to the hospital.
The petitioner contended that its reply to the show cause notice was submitted on time, and the failure to appear for the personal hearing was due to notices being sent to an abandoned email address, which had been changed. The order passed was erroneous as it failed to consider the submitted reply and did not provide a fair opportunity for a personal hearing.
High Court Held
The Allahabad High Court held that the impugned order was passed without considering the reply submitted by the assessee and without providing a fair opportunity for a personal hearing. The notices for the hearing were sent to an outdated email address, preventing the hospital from attending.
The Court quashed the order and remanded the matter for reconsideration, directing the authorities to afford the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing and pass an appropriate order.
The post Order to Be Set Aside as Authority Sent Notices on Email ID Which Was Changed With Intimation to Authority | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.