This compilation indexes twelve High Court rulings from 2026 in which Section 75(4) of the Central/State Goods and Services Tax Acts — which mandates that a personal hearing opportunity be granted before an adverse order is passed — was directly engaged. The cases span the Gauhati, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Patna, Karnataka, Telangana, Punjab-Haryana, Gujarat, and Madhya Pradesh High Courts. The compilation is intended for in-house GST teams, Big-4 indirect tax associates, and law firm researchers who need a quick-reference index of recent judicial treatment of this procedural safeguard.

Research index only. This page is a structured case-law reference tool. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice. Always verify against the full judgment text and check for subsequent stays, appeals, or reversals before relying on any ruling.

The statutory framework in one paragraph

Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (and its mirror provisions in the respective State GST Acts) provides that an opportunity of personal hearing shall be granted to a person chargeable with tax or penalty where a request is received in writing from such person, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against him. This requirement is widely understood as a codification of the principles of natural justice — specifically the rule of audi alteram partem — within the GST adjudication framework. The provision operates alongside related adjudication sections (such as Section 73 for non-fraud demands and Section 74 for fraud/suppression demands) and interacts with appellate provisions, limitation rules, and service-of-notice requirements across the GST statute.

The 12 rulings

1. Brahmaputra Tele Productions Pvt. Ltd vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors

Bench: Gauhati High Court
Date: 29 July 2026
Sections engaged: 168A, 73(10), 73(9), 75(4), 75(6)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (WP(C)/2848/2024) was filed before the Gauhati High Court by a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, with its office in Assam, challenging proceedings initiated by Central and State GST authorities. The source preview indicates the matter was heard on 29 July 2026 and an oral judgment and order was pronounced on that date; full substantive reasoning is not available from the source preview.

2. M/S Royal Petro And Chemicals vs State Of Rajasthan

Bench: Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Date: 29 July 2026
Sections engaged: 107, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The petitioner, a proprietorship concern registered under GST in Rajasthan, filed D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13504/2026 before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur seeking a direction commanding respondents to entertain an appeal, as indicated in the source preview. The petition was decided by an oral order on 29 July 2026; the full operative reasoning is not available from the source preview.

3. Chotu Devi vs Union Of India

Bench: Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Date: 24 July 2026
Sections engaged: 75(4), 93
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The petitioner, aged about 57 years, described as wife and legal heir of a deceased proprietor of M/s Shri Satguru Marbles Industry in Kishangarh, Ajmer, Rajasthan, filed D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11576/2026 before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur against Union of India and multiple GST authorities. The source preview identifies the parties and the bench but does not disclose the substantive grounds or operative directions of the order.

4. M/S Ayaz Traders vs Service Tax & Others

Bench: Uttarakhand High Court
Date: 23 July 2026
Sections engaged: 73(9), 169, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition challenges two orders: an order dated 17.11.2023 passed by the Proper Officer under Section 73(9) of the UKGST Act, 2017, and an order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation. The petitioner's case, as disclosed in the source preview, is that the registration of the petitioner-firm was cancelled on 12.08.2021 with effect from 31.07.2021, and that after such cancellation a Show Cause Notice dated 27.07.2023 was issued followed by the impugned adjudication order; the petitioner further submitted that service of the Show Cause Notice and the adjudication order was attempted by means that are described (but not fully reproduced) in the source preview.

5. M/S Umagaurav Private Limited vs The State Of Bihar

Bench: Patna High Court
Date: 17 July 2026
Sections engaged: 73, 75(4), 75(7)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The petition was filed before the High Court of Judicature at Patna as Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4914 of 2026 by a private limited company having its registered principal place of business under GST in Bihar. The matter was heard by a division bench and a CAV judgment was pronounced on 17 July 2026; the full substantive reasoning and operative directions are not available from the source preview.

6. Sri Arunkumar Basavantappa vs The Assistant Commissioner

Bench: Karnataka High Court
Date: 14 July 2026
Sections engaged: 173(1), 73(9), 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (WP No. 201093 of 2026) was filed before the Karnataka High Court, Kalaburagi Bench, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for a writ of certiorari quashing an impugned order bearing No. ACCT/AUDIT-3/VJP/ADJ-86/2024-25/B-639 dated 30.08.2024 in relation to the tax period 2019-20, on the grounds that it was illegal, without authority of law, and without jurisdiction. The petitioner also sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to re-evaluate the petitioner's tax liability for the period 2019-20 after considering all records, books of accounts, and explanations.

7. Mis.Bengal Cold Rollers Private vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Bench: Telangana High Court
Date: 25 June 2026
Sections engaged: 74(1), 74(2), 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (WP No. 19768 of 2026) challenges an assessment order dated 28.03.2026 passed by respondent No. 1 for the tax period April 2019 – March 2020, as well as a show cause notice dated 18.10.2025 for the same tax period. Per the source preview, the petitioner raised, inter alia, two grounds: first, that the impugned show cause notice was issued on 18.10.2025 with less than the six-month period contemplated under Section 74(2) of the Act; and second, that it was also issued after the 30-day period fixed by the Telangana High Court in W.P. Nos. 25079, 25081, 25084, 25211, 25920, and 25997 of 2024.

8. Urn: Cw / 18306U / 2025Lrs Of Krishan Lal vs Union Of India (2026:Rj-Jd:22845-Db)

Bench: Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Date: 13 May 2026
Sections engaged: 93(1)(b), 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The petitioners, being the legal representatives (LRs) of the deceased-assessee late Shri Krishan Lal, appeared before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10360/2025) assailing an Assessment Order dated 29.08.2024, as stated in the source preview. The matter was decided by an oral order on 13 May 2026; the full operative reasoning is not available from the source preview.

9. Parv Alloys And Metals vs Union Of India And Others

Bench: Punjab-Haryana High Court
Date: 29 April 2026
Sections engaged: 74, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: Through CWP-13039-2026, the petitioner challenged the adjudication order dated 19.05.2023 on the ground that prior to issuance of such order no opportunity of personal hearing was offered to the petitioner, which the petitioner submitted not only violates the principles of natural justice but also contravenes the relevant provision of the GST Act. The source preview also discloses that the show cause notice was issued under Section 74, with a reply date of 02/03/2023, and that demands totalling ₹1,49,26,704 (comprising CGST and SGST components) were raised for the period July 2017 to March in the demand details reproduced in the source.

10. Raja Ram And Sons Distributors vs State Of Punjab And Others

Bench: Punjab-Haryana High Court
Date: 16 April 2026
Sections engaged: 74, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: Through CWP-11251-2026, the petitioner challenged the order dated 05.09.2024 on the ground that prior to passing of such order no opportunity of personal hearing was granted to the petitioner, which the petitioner submitted not only violates the principles of natural justice but also contravenes Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Per the source preview, the petitioner is a sole proprietorship concern engaged in the business of selling car accessories in Jalandhar, Punjab, registered with GST authorities in the State of Punjab; a show cause notice dated 03.05.2024 had been issued with a reply date of 31-05-2024 and no personal hearing date was scheduled.

11. Hannanth Petro Chem Private Limited vs State Of Gujarat

Bench: Gujarat High Court
Date: 9 April 2026
Sections engaged: 74, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petitioner filed R/Special Civil Application No. 2179 of 2026 before the Gujarat High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for quashing and setting aside an order dated 04.11.2025 in Form GST DRC-07 passed under Section 74 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Per the source preview, the issue involved was described as lying in a narrow compass and the court took up the matter for final hearing and final disposal on the date of the order itself; full operative reasoning is not reproduced in the source preview.

12. M/S Annapoorna Electricals vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Bench: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Date: 6 April 2026
Sections engaged: 73, 75(4)
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter was heard by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur on 6 April 2026 as Writ Petition No. 18151 of 2023, clubbed with connected writ petitions filed by M/s Sanjay Paliya Contractor and M/s Annapporna Electricals against the State of Madhya Pradesh and others. The source preview indicates the batch of writ petitions was decided by a common order; full substantive reasoning and operative directions are not available from the source preview.

Patterns across these 12 rulings

Section 75(4) as a standalone challenge ground across multiple courts. Across cases 9 and 10 (Punjab-Haryana High Court), the central ground for challenging the adjudication orders is expressly the non-grant of personal hearing opportunity, with petitioners specifically invoking Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017 alongside a natural justice argument. This pattern of coupling the statutory personal hearing right with a broader natural justice submission appears consistently in the source previews of multiple cases in this compilation.
Section 74 and Section 75(4) frequently co-arise. Cases 9, 10, 11, and 7 all involve Section 74 alongside Section 75(4). This pairing suggests that demands raised under fraud/suppression provisions are a common setting in which personal hearing compliance is contested — likely because Section 74 proceedings carry heavier consequences and the procedural safeguards attract greater scrutiny.
Service of notice and procedural defects post-cancellation of registration. Case 4 (Uttarakhand High Court) discloses that notice was sought to be served after the petitioner's GST registration had already been cancelled, and the appellate authority dismissed the resulting appeal as time-barred. This factual configuration — where the adequacy of service intersects with Section 75(4) — is a distinct sub-pattern in the compilation.
Multi-jurisdictional spread with no single court dominating. The twelve cases span nine different High Court benches (Gauhati, Rajasthan-Jaipur, Rajasthan-Jodhpur, Uttarakhand, Patna, Karnataka, Telangana, Punjab-Haryana, Gujarat, and Madhya Pradesh). This geographic spread indicates that Section 75(4) personal hearing challenges are being raised across the country and are not confined to any particular circuit or GST commissionerate.
Outcomes not yet disclosed in source data. All twelve rulings carry the outcome designation "Outcome not specified in source." Researchers should treat this compilation as an identification and tracking tool and consult the full judgment texts for operative directions, any remands, and any interim relief granted.

How to use this compilation

This index is designed as a starting point for case identification, not as a substitute for reading the full judgment. Each entry above records the court, bench, date, sections engaged, and the procedural ground as disclosed in the source preview. Because the source previews for several cases are limited to party and bench identification, researchers should retrieve the full judgment from indiankanoon.org or the relevant official court portal before drawing any conclusions about the court's actual holding or the operative direction of the order.

Before relying on any ruling listed here, verify whether the order has been stayed, reversed, modified, or appealed to a higher court. Interim orders in writ petitions are particularly susceptible to modification on the next date of hearing, and an oral order reproduced in a source preview may not reflect the final signed order. Check the cause-list of the relevant High Court and any Supreme Court SLP registers for follow-on proceedings.

Finally, readers should cross-check current CBIC circulars, GST Council notifications, and any departmental instructions issued after the date of each judgment. Statutory amendments or new circulars issued after a ruling's date may affect the continuing relevance of the judicial observation to present-day adjudication proceedings.

Source

All cases listed above are drawn from the TaxNoticeAI structured legal corpus (16,101 Indian tax judgments, CBIC circulars, ITAT rulings, AAR rulings, GSTAT rulings), sourced from indiankanoon.org and official court portals.

Section 75(4) GST Personal Hearing: 12 High Court Rulings (2026)