Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2. The petitioner is a works contractor. The specific case of the petitioner is that while settling the bill amounts received, departments had in fact deducted the tax payable. It is not known as to whether remittance was made by the departments or not.

3. Be that as it may, the petitioner’s place of business was inspected by the enforcement wing officials on 10.09.2020. Based on the same, show cause notice was issued on 20.10.2020. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 24.12.2020. However, without granting an opportunity of personal hearing, the impugned orders were straightaway passed. This is on the face of it as violative of Section 75(4) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

4. Therefore, on this sole ground the orders impugned in these writ petitions are quashed. The writ petitions stand allowed. The matter is remitted to the file of the respondent to pass orders afresh in accordance with law. The respondent is obliged to give personal hearing. The respondent may also consider independently and verify the materials placed by the petitioner. If the department which entrusted works contract to the petitioner, had deducted the tax amount but not remitted the same, the respondent may have to proceed against the concerned department. In my view, the entire burden may not be placed on the petitioner herein. The respondent may also independently verify with the respective departments. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.