Item No.7 02.09.2026 Court. No. 9 (Saswata) CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI APPELLATE JURISDICTION WPA 1507 of 2026 Durga Automotive Private Limited Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Anil Kr. Dugar Mr. Debajit Kundu …for the Petitioner. Mr. Jagiriti Mishra Ms. Radhika Agarwal …for the State 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is retained with the record. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 12th December 2023, for the tax period from July 2017 to March 2018 under Section 73 of the WBGST /CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). 3. Mr. Dugar, learned advocate appearing for the for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was completely unaware of the aforesaid order until on 6th July 2026 when the respondent no. 1 had called the petitioner to pay up the dues arising out of the order dated 12th December 2023. 4. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner raises a fundamental question insofar as the enforcement of the aforesaid order is concerned. He submits that the 2 determination was made by the proper officer without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5. In this context, he placed reliance on the summary of show cause cum demand notice uploaded in Form GST DRC – 01 dated 20th July 2023 for the tax period from July 2017 to March 2018 and submits that in the column of providing date, time and venue of personal hearing, the same has been marked with the letters NA. According to him a decision has been rendered by the appropriate authorit without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, I find that the said Act, inter alia, provides when an adverse order is contemplated to be passed by a proper officer under Section 73/74 of the said Act, the proper officer is obliged to afford an opportunity of hearing to the person chargeable with tax irrespective of the fact whether any written request is made. Admittedly, in the instant case it may be noted that though no written request was made, the obligation of the proper officer to afford an opportunity of hearing to the person chargeable with tax remains. Since, admittedly, as would appear from the show cause notice, no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner, I am of the view that the order impugned dated 12th December 2023, for the tax period from July 2017 to March 2018 under Section 73 of the said Act cannot be sustained. The show 3 cause cum demand notice is remanded back to the proper officer for a fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law. 7. The petitioner shall be at liberty to respond to the show cause within 2 weeks from date. In the event, the petitioner files any response or no response is filed, the proper officer shall pass a reasoned order within a period of 6 weeks from the date of providing opportunity of hearing without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. 8. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 9. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly downloaded from this Court’s official website. (RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)