Mr. Pawan Bhan And Another 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 107. The retained release ledger records the outcome as Disposed and classifies the matter under Appeals & Limitation.
Facts and procedural background
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1430 of 2022
Petitioner :- Mr. Pawan Bhan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akshay Mohiley Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dhananjay Awasthi
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing
Issues before the Court
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing
counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Dhananjay Awasthi,
Court's analysis and findings
2021. The order is assailed on various grounds. It is also urged
that notices were not properly served upon the petitioner.
Sri Dhananjay Awasthi points out that the petitioner has the
alternative statutory remedy of preferring an appeal under
Decision and relief
petitioner prefers an appeal within three weeks from today, the
same shall be entertained on merits and dealt with in
Order Date :- 3.4.2023 Shafique
2023-04-06T13:51:25+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
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1430 of 2022
Petitioner :- Mr. Pawan Bhan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akshay Mohiley Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dhananjay Awasthi
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing
counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Dhananjay Awasthi,
and learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.
The petitioners are essentially aggrieved by order of Assistant
Commissioner, CGST, Division-II, Noida, dated 28th October
2021. The order is assailed on various grounds. It is also urged
that notices were not properly served upon the petitioner.
Sri Dhananjay Awasthi points out that the petitioner has the
alternative statutory remedy of preferring an appeal under
section 107 of the CGST Act, which has not been availed.
Since various factual issues also arise for determining the facts
of the present case, we are not inclined to entertain the writ
The writ petition, accordingly, dismissed for the availability of
an alternative remedy. It is, however, provided that if the
petitioner prefers an appeal within three weeks from today, the
same shall be entertained on merits and dealt with in
Order Date :- 3.4.2023 Shafique
2023-04-06T13:51:25+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. 1430 of 2022
When was the decision delivered?
2023-04-03
Which GST provisions are identified in the case?
GST statutory provision - Section 107
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.