TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
07 Sep 2026 
As on 01/07/2026 itself, the GST law entered the tenth year and on 13/07/2026 one adjudication order was passed in the State of Uttar Pradesh in clear violation of section 75 (7) by way of confirmation of higher demand than the one proposed in the show cause notice. The crux of the issue is not simple violation of section 75 (7) but violation on second occasion after the Allahabad High Court has given an opportunity to the tax official to correct the error by way of order dated 12/02/2026 pertaining to the financial year 2021-22.
The first story: It is gathered from the citation M/s Dell International Services India Private Limited Versus State of U.P. and Another - 2026 (3) TMI 344 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT that the order in original dated 19/01/2026 for the financial year 2021-22 was passed confirming a demand of 13 Crores as against the proposal in the show cause notice of 9 Crores. Due to gross violation of sub section 7 of section 75 which reads as " the amount of tax, interest and penalty demanded in the order shall not be in excess of the amount specified in the notice and no demand shall be confirmed on the grounds other than the grounds specified in the notice", the Allahabad High Court was very liberal on the tax official as it granted four week time to file the counter affidavit and also stayed the operation of OIO dated 19/01/2026.
The second story: OIO was passed again on 13/07/2026 wherein the demand confirmed as per the OIO far exceeded the demand proposed in the Show Cause Notice. The Allahabad High Court simply remanded the case by way of setting aside the OIO dated 13/07/2026. The operative portion reads as "7. Accordingly, no useful purpose may be served in keeping this petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit at this stage. The impugned order dated 13.07.2026 is set aside and the matter remitted to the adjudication authority to pass a fresh order. To the extent opportunity was earlier granted to the State to issue a fresh notice, no further indulgence may be granted on that account. If granted, that indulgence may only amount to granting the revenue authorities a second or a third innings to improve their case. No such indulgence is merited or warranted. Accordingly, the prayer made by the learned Standing Counsel on that count, is declined.
8. With the aforesaid observation, present petition is disposed of".
Citation: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Writ Tax No. - 3409 of 2026 M/S Dell International Services India Private Limited .....Petitioner(s) Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s)
My comments: Is it not the right time to impose cost on all erring officials as we are having full fledged GSTAT benches as the GST is in its tenth year?. The Allahabad High Court has been so generous on the tax officials and even when the same error is committed for the second time also, did not impose any cost, leave the passing of strictures. However, the tax officials can not take it for granted as in yet another case, the Delhi High Court ruled on 02/09/2026 as "Hence, as a last opportunity, the Competent Authority is directed to take a final decision within a period of one (01) week from today. In the event the decision is not taken within the aforesaid period, the salary of the Director General of Analytics and Risk Management shall not be released until a final decision is taken in the matter".
Citation: M/s. Shiv Overseas Versus Union of India & Ors. - 2026 (9) TMI 460 - DELHI HIGH COURT.
Hence it may be observed that imposition of cost or even passing the strictures against the erring tax officials may happen soon when the full -fledged benches of the GSTAT start pronouncing the final orders in respect of the second appeals. This is because writs before High Courts are all on so many laws wherein violation of GST provisions by tax officials may be ignored whereas the GSTAT benches are designed to handle exclusively the GST law where the Judicial as well as Technical members are in a position to distinguish between inadvertent errors, violations and gross violations and deal the situation as the case may be.
Before parting: The tax officials are kindly requested to ensure to invoke 73 or 74 or 74A in the most appropriate manner. To ensure that the Show Cause Notice is duly replied in time and in case no such replies are received, to send a reminder by any other mode other than through the portal. To ensure that the opportunity of personal hearing is granted, even if not requested so to ensure compliance of natural justice. Section 75 (7) is binding on all tax officials as taxpayer has no roll on this except to check whether the OIO is in compliance with section 75 (7).
All taxpayers all over India as well as tax professionals are suggested to check is there any violation on section 75 (7) in respect of each and every adjudication order so as to get relief at GSTAT or High Court as the case may be. As more and more final orders are coming out from various benches of GSTAT, it is hoped that the tax officials start passing adjudication orders in strict compliance with GSTAT rulings on identical cases.