Allowed

M/S Gobind Ram and Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit Agrawal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/221/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the dismissal of an appeal without hearing. The court held that Section 107(8) of the CGST Act mandates an opportunity of hearing. The order dismissing the appeal without hearing was set aside and remanded for a fresh hearing with the petitioner given notice to appear.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 20.01.2024 is set aside. The appellate authority is directed to pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Petitioner directed to appear on 0

M/S Gobind Ram and Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70232

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 221 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- M/S Gobind Ram And Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit Agrawal Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendra S Singh Rathore,Abhishek Upadhyay,Bhavesh Chandel,Radhika Kheria,Rishabh Chauhan,Sachin Upadhyay,Utkarsh Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

¶7

The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 20.01.2024 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed without hearing.

¶8

A perusal of the said order indicates that the appeal was dismissed as the document which were required to be filed were not filed and the appellant was not even present before the appellate authority.

¶9

The neat contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of the mandate of section 107(8)(9) of CGST Act, it is incumbent upon the appellate authority to give an opportunity of hearing. He argues that this issue was also dealt with before this Court in the judgment dated 15.07.2024 Trade Tax Revision No.31 of 2023 (M/s Rajdhani Arms Corporation Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax).

¶10

Considering the provisions contained in Section 107(8) read with relevant rules and there being no provision to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution and following the judgment of this court in the case of Rajdhani Arms Corporation (supra), the impugned order dated 20.01.2024 is set aside. The appellate authority is directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶11

To avoid any further delay, it is directed that the petitioner shall be present himself or through his authorized representative before the Tribunal on 06.11.2024 at 12:00 Noon. In case the petitioner does not present himself, the appellate authority would be at liberty to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law.

¶12

The writ petition stands disposed off with the said directions.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 VNP/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S Gobind Ram and Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit Agrawal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Gobind Ram and Sons Barabanki Thru. Partner Mohit Agrawal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Registration, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Brijesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Ors.

Mrityunjai Singh Shiv Ji Thru. His Natural Guardain Father Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sports and 4 Others

Rabind Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

M/S Lallite Filling Centre, a Sole Proprietorship Thru. Smt. Vijayakirti and Another Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Petroleum and 3 Others

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Food andCIVIL Supplies Lko.and Ors.

M/S Voir India Electronics, New Delhi Thru. Authorized Signatory/ Director Mohit Goyal Vs Debt Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow Bench ,Lko. Thru. Its Registrar and 2 Others