Uttarakhand High Court
WPMB/477/2026 of MANJU Vs STATE TAX OFFICER on 18 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY June 18, 2026 Writ Petition (M/B) No.477 of 2026 Manju ----Petitioner Versus State Tax Officer & Others ----Respondents
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA
AND
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. SUBHASH UPADHYAY
June 18, 2026
Writ Petition (M/B) No.477 of 2026
Manju
----Petitioner
Versus
State Tax Officer & Others
----Respondents
__________________________________________________________
Presence:-
Mr. Rohit Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner through Video Conferencing Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the State through Video Conferencing JUDGMENT : (per Mr. 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. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order-in-original dated 17.04.2024 passed under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand State GST Act, the order in Appeal dated 07.07.2025, the auction notice dated 31.10.2025, demand notice dated 10.12.2025 and citation to appear dated 08.01.2026.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the Department had not fixed any date for hearing and had thus violated the mandate of Section 75(4) of the Act.
4. Ms. Puja Banga, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue submits that the Department, while issuing show cause notice to the petitioner, gave option to him to state whether he wants to be heard personally. The petitioner did not exercise such option and therefore the order was passed without fixing any date for the said purpose. She further submits that the appeal filed by the petitioner has already been dismissed by order dated 07.07.2025 on the ground of limitation.
5. On the previous date, we enquired from learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount in pursuance of the order-in- original dated 17.04.2024.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after obtaining instructions, states that the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount as demanded from her by order dated 17.04.2024.
7. As the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire amount and her specific case is that there has been breach of principles of natural justice as no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to her, we, in the interest of justice, set aside the order-in-original dated 17.04.2024 as well as the order dated 07.07.2025 passed in appeal, subject to the petitioner depositing the entire amount demanded from her by order dated 17.04.2024, within four weeks from today. As soon the amount is deposited, the petitioner shall apprise the concerned respondent about the same along with evidence showing deposit of the amount. Thereupon the concerned respondent will fix a date for hearing and will decide the matter afresh. The deposit made by the petitioner shall be subject to final outcome of the proceedings.
8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
9. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 18.06.2026 Rajni