Hiran Tobaco Factory v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Case note by CA Nikhil Gupta
Case overview
This Allahabad High Court decision concerns GST statutory provision - Section 74. The retained release ledger records the outcome as Disposed and classifies the matter under Demand & Adjudication.
Facts and procedural background
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193674-DB
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1018 of 2023
Petitioner :- Hiran Tobaco Factory Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yashonidhi Shukla,Vedika Nath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
Issues before the Court
Petitioner :- Hiran Tobaco Factory Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yashonidhi Shukla,Vedika Nath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Ms. Vedika Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the State-respondents.
Court's analysis and findings
2. The grievance as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is that an order dated 30.5.2022 have been passed imposing tax and penalty upon the petitioner exercising powers under Section 74 of the UPGST/CGST Act, 2017.
3. The challenge has been laid on the ground that no notice or opportunity as well as personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner and the order has been passed exparte.
4. Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel has invited attention of this Court to Paragraph 15 of the writ petition, which records the statement by the petitioner that an e-mail was received by the Accountant and it was not conveyed to the petitioner. He, thus, submits that the petitioner had adequate notice of the show cause issued against the petitioner.
5. Be that as it may, considering the entire controversy, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to file objections to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks' from today before respondent No. 3. On the filing of the objections, within the time allowed, it is expected that the respondent No. 3 would proceed to consider the objections after giving personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within the next 15 days.
Decision and relief
7. Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and it shall be open for the respondent No. 3 to pass appropriate orders.
Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Ravi Prakash
(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) (Pritinker Diwaker, CJ.)
2023-10-10T11:29:18+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Ratio and practical significance
The binding effect flows from the court's operative reasoning reproduced below, read in the context of the pleaded facts and statutory provisions. Users should not generalise the result beyond materially comparable facts.
- Map the operative reasoning to the exact GST provision and procedural stage.
- Confirm whether a later review, appeal, SLP or subsequent judgment affects reliance.
- Preserve the official case number, decision date and neutral citation in professional work.
Full judgment text
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193674-DB
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1018 of 2023
Petitioner :- Hiran Tobaco Factory Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yashonidhi Shukla,Vedika Nath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Ms. Vedika Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue. Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the State-respondents.
2. The grievance as raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is that an order dated 30.5.2022 have been passed imposing tax and penalty upon the petitioner exercising powers under Section 74 of the UPGST/CGST Act, 2017.
3. The challenge has been laid on the ground that no notice or opportunity as well as personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner and the order has been passed exparte.
4. Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel has invited attention of this Court to Paragraph 15 of the writ petition, which records the statement by the petitioner that an e-mail was received by the Accountant and it was not conveyed to the petitioner. He, thus, submits that the petitioner had adequate notice of the show cause issued against the petitioner.
5. Be that as it may, considering the entire controversy, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to file objections to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks' from today before respondent No. 3. On the filing of the objections, within the time allowed, it is expected that the respondent No. 3 would proceed to consider the objections after giving personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within the next 15 days.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and it shall be open for the respondent No. 3 to pass appropriate orders.
Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Ravi Prakash
(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) (Pritinker Diwaker, CJ.)
2023-10-10T11:29:18+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Finin2min Q&A
What court decided this case?
Allahabad High Court
What was the case number?
WRIT TAX No. 1018 of 2023
When was the decision delivered?
2023-10-09
Which GST provisions are identified in the case?
GST statutory provision - Section 74
What was the recorded outcome?
Disposed
Is the complete judgment text available here?
Yes. This page includes a faithful local rendition of the full text recovered from the issuing court source.
Should this page substitute professional advice?
No. Verify the official citation and later history before professional reliance.
Who authored the Finin2min case note?
CA Nikhil Gupta.