Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/984/2025 of MS WARMMAX INDIA Vs COMMISSIONER OF THE SGST on 7 August 2026
IGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. 7th August, 2026 Writ Petition (M/B) No.984 of 2025 M/s Warmmax India ………….Petitioner Versus Commissioner of the
UKHC010181952025
2026:UHC:6997-DB
IGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.
7th August, 2026
Writ Petition (M/B) No.984 of 2025
M/s Warmmax India
………….Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner of the SGST and Another ----Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Ms. Shabnam, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The present petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:- “i. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quash the order dated 27.04.2024 (Annexure No.
2) passed by the respondent no. 2 U/s 73 of the GST Act. ii. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent not recover any amount and direct the respondent no. 2 any amount to provide opportunity of personal hearing before passing any fresh order.”
2. Ms. Shabnam, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Bailal Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. As such, the impugned order has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice and she
UKHC010181952025
2026:UHC:6997-DB further submits that as per sub section (4) of Section 7, the said opportunity of personal hearing was to be given when the authorities contemplates an order adverse to the interest of the assessee.
3. Ms. Pooja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue is not in a position to show us that any opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner. Consequently, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is found to be sustainable.
4. The impugned order dated 27.04.2024 is accordingly quashed with liberty to the Department to pass a fresh order after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 07.08.2026 KKS