Conditional interference in GST assessment granted where reply was not fully considered and appellate remedy had expired.

The Court found that the assessment and demand order under the Uttar Pradesh GST Act had been passed without full consideration of the assessee's reply, as some pleas remained unaddressed. Although the statutory appeal period under Section 107 had expired, the Court balanced procedural fairness with revenue protection by granting conditional interference. If 50% of the demand, after adjusting any amount already deposited, is paid within four weeks, the impugned order will stand set aside and the matter will be freshly adjudicated after hearing; failing compliance, the writ petition will stand dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment and demand order deserved interference for want of full consideration of the petitioner's reply under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and whether conditional relief could be granted despite expiry of the appellate limitation.

Analysis: The impugned show cause notice and consequential order reflected that only part of the petitioner's reply had been taken into account, while the remaining pleas were not considered. The petitioner had also lost the statutory time to pursue an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. In the peculiar facts, the Court found it appropriate to balance the demand with an opportunity of hearing by granting a conditional remedy.

Conclusion: Conditional interference was warranted. If 50% of the demand, after adjusting any amount already deposited, is paid within four weeks, the order dated 24.07.2023 shall stand set aside and fresh adjudication after hearing shall follow; failing which the writ petition shall stand dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with conditional relief in favour of the petitioner, leaving the assessment order vulnerable only upon compliance with the specified deposit condition.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee's reply is not fully considered and the appellate remedy is no longer available, the Court may grant conditional interference to secure a fresh hearing while protecting the revenue's interest.

---