High Court of Gujarat28 July 2026

Aarya Metals v. State of Gujarat

For assesseeRemanded

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7535 OF 2026

The ruling in brief

Where ITC recovery was ordered against petitioners based on allegations of non-genuine inward supplies without addressing their detailed replies and documents and without granting an opportunity for personal hearing, passing a cryptic two-line order without reasons violated natural justice requirements, rendering the order unsustainable and necessitating its quashing for decision after proper hearing.

Where proceedings for recovery of ITC with interest were initiated without intimating date, time or venue for personal hearing even after reminders, and a cryptic order lacking reasons was passed, failure to provide statutory personal hearing before adverse decision amounted to breach of natural justice, thus vitiating adjudication and rendering impugned order liable to be quashed

Provisions considered

CGST S.75

Section 75 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.

The ruling in brief

Related rulings

Calcutta High Court24 Sept 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Arup Datta v. State of West Bengal

Where tax, interest and penalty demands were raised via SCN and order uploaded only on portal without direct intimation and reply was filed but no personal hearing was afforded before passing ex parte order, principles of natural justice were breached, requiring the adjudication to be quashed and matter reconsidered after granting effective hearing

Delhi High Court22 Sept 2026

For assesseeRemanded

Rohit VIJ v. Commissioner of GST

Where registered person was issued adverse order in Form DRC-07 without being given personal hearing, statutory mandate required hearing either on request or whenever adverse decision was contemplated, such order passed without personal hearing was unsustainable and was set aside with directions for fresh decision after affording effective personal hearing

Andhra Pradesh High Court21 Sept 2026

For assessee

Saptagiri Constructions v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax

Where registered taxpayer supplying works contract services to Government Departments was subjected to a single composite assessment order covering multiple years, such composite assessment was impermissible, so the impugned summary order was set aside and respondents could initiate fresh proceedings for each assessment year separately, with all consequential proceedings revoked

CGST S.75

Aarya Metals v. State of Gujarat

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Aarya Metals v. State of Gujarat

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

Arup Datta v. State of West Bengal

Rohit VIJ v. Commissioner of GST

Saptagiri Constructions v. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax

Read the full analysis