Allowed

M/S G F T Fashion ,Lko. Thru. Its Proprietor Gulsher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 May 2024/101/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation orders. It held that the authority acted without applying its mind by ignoring a submitted reply in the cancellation order. The court quashed the impugned orders and directed a fresh order while dismissing the appeal on limitation grounds.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the cancellation orders dated 21.01.2021 and 13.07.2022. Direct Assistant Commissioner to pass a fresh order considering the petitioner's reply dated 21.01.2021.

M/S G F T Fashion ,Lko. Thru. Its Proprietor… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:35077

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 101 of 2024 Petitioner :- M/S G F T Fashion ,Lko. Thru. Its Proprietor Gulsher Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Of Finance Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anurag Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pranjal Shukla, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶6

By means of the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of an orders dated 21.01.2021 and 27.04.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-8, Lucknow cancelling the registration of the petitioner's proprietorship concerned M/s G.F.T. Fashion, Lucknow. The petitioner has also challenged the validity of an order dated 13.07.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal) State Tax, Judicial Sector-3, Lucknow, dismissing the aforesaid cancellation order dated 27.04.2021.

¶7

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cancellation order dated 21.01.2021 mentions that:-

¶8

"This has reference to your reply dated 21.01.2021 in response to show cause notice dated 12.01.2021.

¶9

Whereas no reply to notice to show cause has been submitted;

¶10

The effective date of cancellation of your registration is 12.01.2021."

¶11

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the aforesaid contents of the cancellation order indicate a total non application of mind by the authority concerned while cancelling the G.S.T registration of the petitioner as on the one hand the order states that it was being passed with reference to the petitioner's reply dated 21.01.2021 but at the same time

¶12

order states that the petitioner had not submitted any reply to the show cause notice. The contents of the petitioner's reply dated 21.01.2021 have also not been taken into consideration while passing of the impugned order.

¶13

Such an unreasoned order cannot be sustained in law as no judicial order can be passed without giving sufficient reasons for passing of the order.

¶14

The appeal filed against the aforesaid order has been dismissed on the ground of limitation only.

¶15

Bar of limitation may bar the remedy of appeal but it does not bar the petitioner's right to seek his constitutional remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly when the impugned order affects valuable rights of the petitioner and the same has been passed without assigning any reason.

¶16

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed . The orders dated 21.01.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sector 8, Lucknow and 13.07.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal) State Tax, Judicial Block-3, Lucknow are hereby set aside and the learned Assistant Commissioner, Lucknow, Sector 2, is directed to pass a fresh order after taking into consideration the submissions made by the petitioner in the reply dated 21.01.2021 given in response to the show cause notice dated 12.01.2021.

¶17

The Respondent No.3 shall be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings, in accordance with law, after giving adequate opportunity to the petitioner to present his case and after taking consideration the pleas taken by the petitioner, if any.

¶18

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶19

Order Date :- 7.5.2024 -Amit K-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S G F T Fashion ,Lko. Thru. Its Proprietor Gulsher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S G F T Fashion ,Lko. Thru. Its Proprietor Gulsher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharam Raj Vs Distt. Registrar Gonda

Susheel Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue and 8 Others

Smt. Sarita Devi Vs Central Bank of India Branch @348 Srinagar Hat Ayodhya and Anr.

Mohd. Majid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko.

Dharmendra Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Naresh Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others