Jurisdictional doubt over GST adjudication led the Court to keep proceedings in abeyance pending further hearing.

Adjudication proceedings were kept in abeyance because the challenge raised a jurisdictional doubt linked to earlier proceedings under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that the prior proceedings had concluded and that the appeal order had attained finality, so further adjudication on the same material should not continue. Pending counter and rejoinder, the Court protected the petitioner by staying the proceedings until the next date of listing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication proceedings should remain stayed in view of the challenge to jurisdiction arising from the earlier proceedings under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petitioner relied on the earlier conclusion of proceedings under Section 67 and the asserted finality of the order passed in appeal, contending that adjudication on the same material and circumstances should not continue. The Court found the matter required consideration and, pending counter and rejoinder, protected the petitioner by keeping the adjudication proceedings in abeyance.

Conclusion: The adjudication proceedings were stayed till the next date of listing on the ground that their continuation raised a jurisdictional doubt.

---