Disposed¶19

Smt.Suman Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Reg. Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2025/1419/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

UPGST Section 73 assessment order quashed; no SCN uploaded on GST portal after registration cancellation; natural justice violation; Commercial/State Tax Officer Sector 4 Barabanki; Article 226 writ tax; relies on M/s Katyal Industries 2024:AHC:23697-DB; Department free to issue fresh proper notice; disposed of December 9, 2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Shekhar B. Saraf J.; Manjive Shukla J.; petitioner Smt.Suman Pathak; counsel Sheo Shankar Verma; C.S.C. for State.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with the impugned order dated 15.02.2025 quashed and set aside; Department at liberty to issue a proper notice to the petitioner and act in accordance with law. ¶19

Smt.Suman Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT TAX No. - 1419 of 2025

Smt.Suman Pathak

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Reg. Lko And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Sheo Shankar Verma
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

¶9

Court No. - 3

¶10

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶12

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.02.2025 passed by the respondent No.3, Commercial/State Tax Officer, Sector 4, Barabanki under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

¶13

Factual matrix in the matter is that the petitioner's registration under the Act was cancelled. Subsequent to the same, no business was carried out by the petitioner. It appears that no show cause notice was uploaded on the GST portal and despite the same, the order impugned was passed under Section 73 of the Act.

¶14

Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner relies upon an order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in M/s Katyal Industries v. State of U.P. and others , Neutral Citation No.2024:AHC:23697-DB. We are essentially in agreement with the said principle enunciated by the coordinate Bench in the said order.

¶15

We find that there has been violation of the principle of natural justice, and accordingly, the impugned order dated 15.02.2025 passed by the respondent No.3 is quashed and set aside. The Department shall be at liberty to issue a proper notice to the petitioner and act in accordance with

¶16

WTAX No. 1419 of 2025

¶17

¶18

law.

¶19

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶20

(Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶21

December 9, 2025 Ashutosh

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt.Suman Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Reg. Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Suman Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax and Reg. Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ajai Kumar vs U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. Shakti Bhawan Lko. and 2 Others

Radhey Shyam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 11 Others

Durgawati and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt., Lko and Another

Ram Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 9 Others

Brightspark Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director Vipin Kumar Aggarwal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Finance U.P. Lko. and Another

Amarjeet and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue and 3 Others