Writ petition challenging GST adjudication order disposed; petitioner granted right to appeal. The writ petition challenging an adjudication order under Section 74 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 for the tax period of July 2017 was disposed of. The court ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Writ petition challenging GST adjudication order disposed; petitioner granted right to appeal.
The writ petition challenging an adjudication order under Section 74 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 for the tax period of July 2017 was disposed of. The court noted that the petitioner had the right to appeal against the concluded adjudication order, hence no interference was warranted. The challenges against show cause notices for the periods of July 2017 to March 2018 were also addressed, allowing the petitioner to raise objections in the proceedings. The State was granted liberty to withdraw a mistakenly issued notice, permitting the appropriate authority to issue a further notice for the relevant period. The petitioner was permitted to file an appeal within two weeks.
Issues: Challenge to adjudication order under Section 74 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 for the tax period July 2017, challenge to show cause notices dated 09.04.2021 and 23.12.2020 for the period July 2017 to March 2018 under different sections of the UP GST Act, 2017.
Analysis: The present writ petition sought to quash the adjudication order dated 29.05.2021 passed by the respondent under Section 74 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 concerning the tax period of July 2017. Additionally, challenges were raised against two other show cause notices dated 09.04.2021 for the period July 2017 to March 2018 under Section 127 of the Act and a notice dated 23.12.2020 for the same period under Section 74 (3) of the Act. The adjudication proceedings under Section 74 (3) had been concluded against the petitioner for the period of July 2017, and it was noted that the petitioner had the right to appeal against this order, thus no interference was warranted in the present writ petition regarding the order dated 29.05.2021.
Regarding the notice dated 09.04.2021, it was revealed that no prior adjudication existed for the proceedings under Section 127 of the Act. The petitioner had submitted a written reply dated 17.04.2021, and it was decided to allow the petitioner to raise objections in those proceedings, hence interference with the notice dated 09.04.2021 was also declined.
As for the third notice dated 23.12.2020 for the period July 2017 to March 2018, it was stated by the learned Standing Counsel that the notice had been issued mistakenly, as a previous notice had already been issued for the period of July 2017, and the dispute for that period had been adjudicated by the earlier order dated 29.05.2020. Therefore, the State was granted liberty to withdraw the notice dated 23.12.2020, allowing the appropriate authority to issue a further notice in accordance with the law for the period of August 2017 to March 2018.
In conclusion, the writ petition was disposed of, permitting the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate forum. It was mentioned that if the appeal was filed within two weeks from the date of the judgment, it should be decided on its merits as expeditiously as possible, considering the circumstances at hand.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
