Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
2.The issue in all the three writ petitions is one and the same though the assessment years are different. Though very many grounds have been taken by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions, I am of the view that these writ petition can be disposed of on a short ground.
3.The petitioner’s counsel draws my attention to Section 75(4) of Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, which reads as follows:
“An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.”
4.I posed a specific question to the learned Special Government Pleader as to whether specific opportunity of personal hearing by mentioning the date was given. It is not in dispute that individual and separate personal hearing notice was not issued to the petitioner. On the ground of violation of statutory mandate under Section 75(4) of Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, the impugned orders have to be necessarily quashed. They are accordingly quashed. The matters are remitted to the file of the respondent to pass orders afresh in accordance with law. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter.
5.With this liberty to the respondent to pass orders in accordance with law, these writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.