HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 1412 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 21/02/2025 (Annexure no.1) passed by the Opp. Party No.2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the opposite parties to not to enforce/ proceed to recovery, the order U/s 73 dated 21/02/2025 against the petitioner firm passed by the Opposite Party No.2" 3. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner Firm is a sole proprietorship Firm registered in the name of Indra Bhan Singh. For the period of April, 2020 to March, 2021, the returns of the petitioner Firm were scrutinized by the Department and the respondent no.2 has uploaded a notice under Section 61 of the Act on 18.07.2022. The petitioner Firm was directed to submit a reply by 30.07.2022. A further notice was issued under Section 73(1) of the Act on Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Satish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Inder Bhan Singh Thru. Proprietor Indra Bhan Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Institutional Finanfe And Another .....Respondent(s) 27.11.2024 again on the tab relating to the 'Additional Notices'. The petitioner Firm could not access such notice. This notice had directed reply to be filed by 27.12.2024. 4. It has been submitted that the notice under Section 73(1) did not indicate the place, time or date of personal hearing. 5. The respondent no.2 has adjudicated the case by an order dated 21.02.2025 under Section 73 of the Act imposing the tax liability along with interest and penalty amounting to Rs.19,43,358/-. 6. A request has been made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Department may be directed to give a personal hearing to Proprietor of the Firm i.e. Indra Bhan Singh. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also pointed out Form GST DRC -01, filed at page-32 of the paper book, which is a summary of the show cause notice issued to the petitioner under Section 73 of the Act. He has pointed out that although the date by which reply had to be submitted has been mentioned as 27.12.2024, no date of personal hearing, time of personal hearing and venue of personal hearing, have been mentioned in the said notice. 8. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondent, says that a Statutory remedy of filing an Appeal under Section 107 is available to the petitioner. 9. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the G.S.T. Act. 10. However, we are constrained to observe that repeatedly we are finding such kind of notices to be issued under Section 73 of the Act where law has already been settled by this Court and the Departmental Circular is in place which provides that date, time and place of personal hearing shall be mentioned in the show cause notice. 11. We direct the Department concerned to send Ms. Smriti Gupta, Commercial Tax Officer, Ayodhya Sector-5, Ayodhya (B), Ayodhya, U.P., for training for three month. She shall not be assigned any WTAX No. 1412 of 2025 2 adjudicatory role for the period of three months. December 8, 2025 Rahul WTAX No. 1412 of 2025 3 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench