Jai Bahadur Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Commercial Tax Lko. And 2 Others
Case note by CA Nikhil Gupta
Case overview
This Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) decision concerns None. The retained release ledger records the outcome as Allowed / set aside and classifies the matter under Appeals & Limitation.
Facts and procedural background
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 20 of 2023
Petitioner :- Jai Bahadur Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Commercial Tax Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shachindra Pratap Singh,Neeraj Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for
Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 22.12.2022 passed by
Issues before the Court
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for
Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 22.12.2022 passed by
the respondent no.1, whereby the Appeal No.103 of 2022, U.P. Goods and
Court's analysis and findings
for the benefit of the order passed by this Court in Writ Tax No.145 of 2022
(Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow Vs. Union of India and others) dated
26.09.2022. In the said judgment, the Court has held that the impugned order
does not assign any reason whatsoever for cancelling registration of the
Decision and relief
case, the petitioner appears along with the reply and the certified copy of this
order, the respondents shall proceed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.1.2023 Arti/-
2023-01-24T15:31:17+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
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
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 20 of 2023
Petitioner :- Jai Bahadur Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Commercial Tax Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shachindra Pratap Singh,Neeraj Kumar Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for
Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 22.12.2022 passed by
the respondent no.1, whereby the Appeal No.103 of 2022, U.P. Goods and
Service Tax Act, 2017 filed against the cancellation of registration has been
dismissed with further direction to revoke the GST registration of the petitioner.
The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is the sole proprietary of the firm
engaged in the business of civil work contract and was registered under GST
Act. It appears that the GST return was not filed by the counsel and thereafter a
show cause notice dated 19.08.2019 was issued, directing the petitioner to
furnish a reply to the notice within seven working days from the date of service
The case of the petitioner is that he has not been able to get the show cause
notice issued by the respondent and, therefore, he could not submit the reply
within the stipulated time and, thus, an order came to be passed on 16.09.2019
whereby registration of the petitioner was cancelled. Against the said order, the
petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed by the appellate authority on the
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since he has not been heard while
passing the order dated 16.09.2019, as such the present petitioner is also entitled
for the benefit of the order passed by this Court in Writ Tax No.145 of 2022
(Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow Vs. Union of India and others) dated
26.09.2022. In the said judgment, the Court has held that the impugned order
does not assign any reason whatsoever for cancelling registration of the
petitioner and is passed only on the ground that reply to the show cause notice is
not given. The non-submission of reply to the show cause cannot be a ground for
cancellation of the registration. The relevant Paragraphs 9 and 10, of the
judgment in Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow (Supra), read as under:-
"9. The Counsel for the petitioner argues that the appeal has been dismissed as being beyond limitation as such the doctrine of merger would not apply and the petitioner is fair entitled to seek judicial review of the order dated 03.01.2022 on the ground that the same is non speaking order. This Court while deciding Writ Tax No.147 of 2022 (M/S Chandrasen, Sarda Nagar, Lucknow vs Union of India and others) had held that the order of cancellation of registration or any other order passed either on administrative or on judicial side is without any reason and prima facie, without application of mind, the same does not stand the test of scrutiny under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
10. Thus, following the said judgment rendered in the case of M/s Chandrasen (Supra), the writ petition deserves to be allowed."
In view thereof, the present petitioner is also entitled for the same relief. The
benefit of the order dated 26.9.2022 passed in Writ Tax No.145 of 2022, shall
also be made available to the present petitioner.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 16.09.2019 as well
as the appellate order dated 22.12.2022, is set aside and the petitioner is
permitted to appear before the respondent along with the reply to show cause
notice and the certified copy of this order as well as the copy of the judgment
passed in Writ Tax No.145 of 2022 (Technosum India Pvt. Ltd. Lucknow Vs.
Union of India and others) dated 26.09.2022, within three weeks from today. In
case, the petitioner appears along with the reply and the certified copy of this
order, the respondents shall proceed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.1.2023 Arti/-
2023-01-24T15:31:17+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Finin2min Q&A
What court decided this case?
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
What was the case number?
WRIT TAX No. 20 of 2023
When was the decision delivered?
2023-01-24
Which GST provisions are identified in the case?
None
What was the recorded outcome?
Allowed / set aside
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.