M/S Radhey Krishna Trading Company Thru. Proprietor,Suresh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Tax And Registration) Lko. And 2 Others
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 910 of 2025 . Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
The present petition has been filed challenging an order dated 21.09.2022 passed under Section 74(9) of the CGST Act as well as the order dated 09.09.2025 whereby, the appeal was dismissed.
The counsel for the petitioner states that the notices with regard to the appeal were uploaded on the additional tab, however same date was fixed for filing reply and the personal hearing, which is contrary to the mandate of the Act.
Learned Standing Counsel based upon the instructions has not dispute the said facts.
Finding the order to be violative of Section 75(4) of the GST Act and the issue being covered by the judgment in the case of Mahaveer Trading Company vs Deputy Commissioner State Tax and another: Writ Tax No.303 of 2024, decided on 04.03.2024, the impugned order dated 21.09.2022 and the impugned order dated 09.09.2025 are quashed. The writ petition is allowed.
The matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority to pass fresh Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pankaj Shukla, Sampurna Nand Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Radhey Krishna Trading Company Thru. Proprietor,Suresh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Tax And Registration) Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
order, in accordance with law, after providing adequate opportunity of hearing. September 11, 2025 akverma WTAX No. 910 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.