M/S Credit Express Thru. Proprietor Shri Devendra Yadav Alias Devendra Kumar Yadav vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sale Tax Lko. And 2 Others

Original PDF →
WTAX/769/2025HC AllahabadGSTCNR UPHC02061320202519 August 2025Bench: SANGEETA CHANDRA,BRIJ RAJ SINGH2 pages
For Petitioner: Kushagra Kanodia, Akhilesh, Pratap Singh, Himanshu Vikram Singh

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48601-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 769 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Credit Express Thru. Proprietor Shri Devendra Yadav Alias Devendra Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sale Tax Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kushagra Kanodia,Akhilesh Pratap Singh,Himanshu Vikram Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

2.

This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers :- "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned assessment orders dated 08.12.2023, 15.04.2024, and 16.08.2024 for the Financial Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020- 2021 respectively, along with the consequential recovery orders. (Annexed as Annexure No. 2) ; ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent authorities to de-freeze the petitioner's current account bearing No. 032505004842 maintained with ICICI Bank, Aliganj Branch, Lucknow, IFSC Code: ICIC0000325, held in the name of M/s Credit Express, which has been frozen pursuant to the impugned orders, and to refrain from taking any further coercive action without due process of law."

3.

The Counsel appearing for the State-respondents has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition as there is a statutory remedy available and he says that petitioner has challenged Assessment Orders relating to Financial Year 2017-18 onwards till 2020- 21 on the ground that he had not received any show cause notice before making such assessment.

4.

The counsel for the respondents has pointed out the pleadings in the writ petition. In Paragraphs 14 and 18 thereof wherein Paragraph 14, it has been stated by the petitioner that the summary Assessment Orders and demand notices were uploaded on the portal without granting personal hearing in violation of Section 75 (4) of the U.P. GST Act.

5.

In Paragraph 18, it has been stated that the Assessment Orders and notices were never reflected in the dedicated Tab "Notices" of the petitioner's GST portal. Instead, the same were placed only in the Tab with the Heading

"Additional Notices." which is not ordinarily used for statutory communications. Consequently, the petitioner could not become aware of the said notices in normal course of business and came to know of them only incidentally, after adverse actions were taken against the petitioner by putting his bank account on debit freeze.

6.

It has also been pointed out at page 53 of the paper book that there are two kinds of Notices/Orders and as is evident from the Note placed on the Portal, Notices/Orders issued by the Tax Authorities which are available under the Tab "Additional Notices and Orders" pertaining to modules- Advance Ruling, Appeal, Assessment/Adjudication, Audit, Enforcement, Prosecution and Compounding, Recovery, LUT etc., whereas Notices/Orders issued by Tax Authorities available under the Tab "Notices and Orders" relate to Intimations pertaining to registration, amendment, cancellation, revocation and other communications and Notices issued by the System to return defaulters in Form GSTR-3A, and Notices pertaining to Return Module comprising GST DRC-01B and GST DRC-01C and Summary of Assessment Orders issued in Form GST DRC-07 where notices and other proceedings were held offline.

7.

It has been submitted by Shri Rajesh Tiwari that all Assessments/Adjudication, Notices/Orders only appear under the Tab "Additional Notices and Orders." The petitioner was fully aware and should have been vigilant enough to refer to this Portal under the Tab "Additional Notices and Orders." The petitioner did not respond to notices relating to incorrect input tax credit claimed by him.

8.

It has been submitted that all show cause notices/provisional Assessment Orders and any kind of notices which are uploaded on the portal of the Assessee are also made available to the Assessee via SMS and E- mail. There is no pleading on record that the petitioner did not receive any SMS or E-mail from the Department.

9.

We are of the considered opinion that the writ petition suffers from grave laches and even otherwise, is not maintainable in view of statutory remedy of Appeal being available. The writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 Pks POOJA SETH 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.