Dismissed¶18

M/S Ashfaq Ahmad Khan Thru. Proprietor Ashaphak Ahmad Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Finance Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2026WTAX/148/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WTAX 148 of 2026; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Jaspreet Singh, J.; decided 02.02.2026; GST writ petition; appellate order dated 23.08.2025 by Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeals) Ayodhya Sector-2; dismissal on alternate remedy; Appellate Tribunal constituted; Notification dated 17.09.2025 under s.112 CGST Act 2017; limitation extended up to 30.06.2026; liberty to file second appeal before Tribunal; merits not examined; petitioner M/s Ashfaq Ahmad Khan; respondents State of U.P.; counsel Deepak Kumar Pandey, Mohd Imad Abdullah Warsi; C.S.C.

What did the court decide?

Liberty left open to the petitioner to file a second appeal before the Tribunal; such appeal, if filed, to be decided on its own merits. ¶18

M/S Ashfaq Ahmad Khan Thru. Proprietor Ashaphak Ahmad… — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT TAX No. - 148 of 2026

¶3

M/S Ashfaq Ahmad Khan Thru. Proprietor Ashaphak Ahmad Khan

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Finance Lko And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Deepak Kumar Pandey, Mohd Imad Abdullah Warsi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶7

Court No. - 6

¶8

HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶10

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner has assailed the appellate order dated 23.08.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeals) Ayodhya Sector-2 (Appellate Authority) State GST Department, U.P. i.e respondent no.3 whereby the order passed by the adjudicating authority has been affirmed.

¶11

Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents at the outset has submitted that the petitioner has adequate statutory remedy for filing a second appeal before the Tribunal. It has also been pointed out that earlier the writ petitions were being entertained as the Tribunal was not functioning. However, the Tribunal has now been properly constituted and in so far as the issue of limitation is concerned, in terms of the Notification dated 17th September, 2025 all appeals before the Tribunal would be treated to be within time uptill 30th June, 2026. The relevant portion of the aforesaid notification is being reproduced herein below:-

¶12

"In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017), the Government, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby notifies the 30th day of June, 2026, as the date

¶13

WTAX No. 148 of 2026

¶14

¶15

upto which appeal may be filed before the Appellate Tribunal under this Act in respect of all cases where the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the person preferring the appeal before the 1 day of April, 2026 and all appeals in respect of order communicated on or after 1 April, 2026 may be filed before the Appellate Tribunal within three months from the date on which such order is communicated to the person preferring the appeal."

¶16

It is thus urged that in view thereof the petitioner has the statutory remedy which can be availed.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner though attempted to make submissions but could not dispute the fact that the Tribunal has been constituted and in terms of the notification he has the limitation as well.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid, this Court does not find it appropriate to entertain the petition which is accordingly dismissed, leaving it open for the petitioner to file the second appeal before the Tribunal. In case such an appeal is filed before the Tribunal, the same shall be decided on its own merit. It is clarified that the Court has not examined the merits and the petition has been declined only on the ground of alternate remedy.

¶19

(Jaspreet Singh,J.)

¶20

February 2, 2026

¶21

Asheesh

¶22

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

M/S Ashfaq Ahmad Khan Thru. Proprietor Ashaphak Ahmad Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Finance Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ashfaq Ahmad Khan Thru. Proprietor Ashaphak Ahmad Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Finance Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Pratap Nagar Plywood Industries Pratap Nagar Hardoi Thru. Its Partner Jakir Husain vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax Registration Lko. and 3 Others

Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority Thru. Auth. Signatory Jeetendra Bahadur Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Infra. and Industrial Development Lko. and Another

Uttar Pradesh Purva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. Thru. A.G.M. vs Iti Limited through its Assistant General Manager (Unit Head)

C/M Lala Bhikhari Lal Laxmi Devi Kanya Shiksha Sansthan Lko. Thru. Manager and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 3 Others

Bal Krishna and Others Vs State of U.P. through Secy. Dept. of Land Ceiling and Others

Zakir Mohammad Ikram Khan vs Arif Khan and Ors.