Quashed

M/S Aastha Construction Thru. Prop. Seema Singh Hargaon Pargana v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Commercial Tax Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC24 Oct 2024/237/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing before the cancellation of their registration. Applying the ratio from Chandra Sain, the impugned orders were quashed and remanded to the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh order after due hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 27.02.2023 and 25.07.2024 were quashed and matter remanded to the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh order after giving opportunity of hearing.

M/S Aastha Construction Thru. Prop. Seema Singh Hargaon Pargana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Commercial Tax Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:71917

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 237 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- M/S Aastha Construction Thru. Prop. Seema Singh Hargaon Pargana Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Commercial Tax Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others

¶5

Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Bhanu Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anindya Shastri,Dipak Seth

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent, Sri Anindya Shastri, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and 3 and perused the record.

¶8

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 27.02.2023 whereby registration of the petitioner was cancelled as well as the order dated 25.07.2024 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed for want of limitation.

¶9

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the order impugned cancelling the registration was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the fact that the said issue with regard to non grant of opportunity of hearing and non fixation of date of hearing was decided by this Court in the case of M/S Chandra Sain, Sharda Nagar, Lucknow Through its Proprietor Mr. Chandra Sain Versus U.O.I. through Secy. Ministry of Finance, New Delhi and Others, decided on 22.09.2022 in Writ Tax No. 147 of 2022 . The said fact and the reasoning contained squarely applies to the present case also. Following the said judgment, the impugned orders dated 27.02.2023 and 25.07.2024 are quashed. The matter is remanded to the Assessing Authority

¶11

to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶12

The petition is disposed of in terms of the above.

¶13

Order Date :- 24.10.2024 Arun

¶14

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

M/S Aastha Construction Thru. Prop. Seema Singh Hargaon Pargana v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Commercial Tax Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aastha Construction Thru. Prop. Seema Singh Hargaon Pargana v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. Commercial Tax Deptt. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Yamini Bansal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mangra @ Taufeeq Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secy. Lko.

Ajayjeet @ Sanju Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue U.P. Lko and 5 Others

Brijesh Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Brijesh Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home