M/S Shivam Guest House, Thru. Proprietor Shailendra Mishra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State Tax Lko. And Another

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has prayed for the following substantial reliefs: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to quash the impugned order dated 06.11.2020 passed by opposite party no. 02, i.e. Deputy Commissioner State Tax, Sector-2, Lucknow, wherein a penalty of Rs. 157760240.43 has been imposed on the petitioner U/S 122(i), (ii) R/W 127 of the GST Act annexed as ANNEXURE NO. 1. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Opposite No-2 to unfreeze the saving account of the petitioner which have been feezed as a part of recovery.\ iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the Opposite No-2 to stop the recovery proceeding against the petitioner."

From a perusal of the facts, it appears that a syndicate has been committing fraud by using names of various persons and by issuing invoices in the name of other persons, allowing third parties to claim input tax credit fraudulently. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anurag Srivastava, Manas Shukla, Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Shivam Guest House, Thru. Proprietor Shailendra Mishra .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State Tax Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s)

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was never even aware of the fact of the registration upon which such bills have been created. He was further not aware of the impugned order dated 06.11.2020 and was only made aware of the same, when his savings bank account was attached in the year 2025. 5. Shri Sanjay Sareen, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the GST Department has fairly submitted that there appears to be a syndicate of fraudsters and the petitioner may not have any hand in the alleged illegal activities. He fairly submits that the petitioner should be allowed to make his stand clear before the authorities.

In light of the same, the impugned order dated November 6, 2020 is quashed and set aside with a direction upon the authorities to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.

Furthermore, the authorities are directed to unfreeze the savings bank account of the petitioner within a period of one week from date.

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. October 15, 2025 Ashutosh WTAX No. 1074 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench