Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5359 (UTT)

SINGH DHABA AND RESTAURENT v. THE COMMISSIONER STATE TAX

WPMB/219/2026 · 2026-05-14

Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta, Subhash Upadhyay

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:3688-DB I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SHRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 1 4 TH MAY, 2 0 2 6 W RI T PETI TI ON ( M/ B) No. 2 19 OF 2 0 2 6 Singh Dhaba & Restaurent. …Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, State Tax and another. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner. : Mr. Ashish Agarwal, learned counsel. Counsel for the respondents. : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT : (per Sh r i Man oj Ku m ar Gu p t a, C.J.) 1. The petitioner has assailed an order dated 27.04.2023 passed by respondent no. 2, under Section 73 of the UKGST Act, in respect of Financial Year 2017-18, thereby raising a demand of Rs. 4,06,834.36/ -. He has also challenged the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by respondent no. 2, in exercise of power of rectification, thereby making amendments in the original order and imposing penalty. 2. The challenge is on the ground that, before passing the order under Section 73 of the Act, no personal hearing was provided to the petitioner, and consequently the impugned order is in violation of Section 75(4) of the Act. 1 2026:UHC:3688-DB 3. A Supplementary Affidavit has been filed by the petitioner stating that no notice was ever served to the petitioner intimating him of any date for personal hearing. 4. Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue does not dispute that, in the show cause notice dated 06.01.2023, no date for personal hearing was fixed. She is also not in a position to show to us from any material that any date for personal hearing was ever fixed. 5. Consequently, the order under Section 73, and the subsequent order, rectifying the original order, cannot be sustained and are, hereby, quashed. The Revenue shall be at liberty to pass a fresh order, strictly in accordance with law, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 7. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 14th May, 2026 Rahul 2 RAHUL PRAJAPATI Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e 66e61bf4c848741983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8 A192FCAD15C390A1AAD7B39857D2540AE 4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2026.05.15 11:32:51 +05'30'