BharatTaxGST

M/S Bhadohi Gas Service vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Original PDF →
WTAX/2274/2025HC AllahabadGSTCNR UPHC01233418202507 August 20252 pages
For Petitioner: Aditya PandeyFor Respondent: C.S.C., Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal, J., Heard Mr. Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and, Mr. Ravi Shanker Pandey, learned ACSC for the State-, respondents., By means of present petition, the petitioner is assailing the

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134505 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2274 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Bhadohi Gas Service Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aditya Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

1.

Heard Mr. Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ravi Shanker Pandey, learned ACSC for the State- respondents.

2.

By means of present petition, the petitioner is assailing the orders dated 3.3.2025 passed by respondent no. 2 (F.Y. 2017-18) as well as the order dated 12.12.2023 passed by respondent no. 3 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act, for F.Y. 2017-18)

3.

Vide order dated 15.5.2025, the State was granted time for filing of counter affidavit but no counter affidavit has been filed, therefore, with the consent of parties, the writ petition is being decided finally.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm having GSTIN No. 09AIJPS1019G1Z8. He submits that a show cause notice dated 15.9.2023 in FORM GST DRC 01 was issued by respondent no. 3 under Section 73 of the Act demanding Rs.68,41,269.13/- but the petitioner could not see the aforesaid notice as well as the reminder as it was not posted in the notices and order but the same was posted in additional notices and orders in the GST portal, therefore, the petitioner could not file objection but the impugned order has been passed without giving any proper opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, which is gross violation of principles of natural justice.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered with the Division Bench judgement of this Court passed in M/s Ashish -2024:AHC:173796-DB). He prays for allowing the present writ petition.

6.

Per contra, learned ACSC supports the impugned order.

7.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the records.

8.

It is not in dispute that the show cause notice has been uploaded in additional notices and orders instead of notice and order in the GST portal and the impugned order has been passed exparte without affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

9.

The issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgement this Court passed in M/s Ashish Traders (supra), therefore, the present writ petition is decided in the same terms as enumerated in the case of M/s Ashish Traders (supra).

10.

In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are set aside.

11.

The matter is remanded to the assessing authority, who shall issue fresh notice to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of one week from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to submit its reply within 15 days after receipt of the notice and after submitting the reply within time, the adjudicating authority shall pass reasoned and speaking order, within a period of two months thereafter, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Rahul Dwivedi/- RAHUL DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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.