U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam LTD. Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan Thru. Managing Director vs. Commissioner Of State Tax Commissioners Office Lko And 3 Others

WTAX/267/2024HC AllahabadGSTCNR UPHC02075241202405 November 2024Bench: ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI,SUBHASH VIDYARTHI2 pages
For Petitioner: Pradeep Agrawal, Alok Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: C.S.C., Dipak Seth, Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi, J., Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi, J., Heard Sri Pradeep Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The Court directed the GST authorities to take an appropriate decision on the petitioner's reply expeditiously, preferably within two months. The decision should be communicated to the petitioner.

Facts

The petitioner received multiple summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act regarding Input Tax Credit claims. The petitioner argued that after submitting a detailed reply to the first summons, subsequent summons were issued contrary to CBIC guidelines.

Key Issues

Whether the issuance of successive summons was justified after a detailed reply was submitted, and whether the summoning authority had the correct jurisdiction.

Sections Cited

Section 70, Section 6

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:73012-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 267 of 2024 Petitioner :- U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan Thru. Managing Director Respondent :- Commissioner Of State Tax Commissioners Office Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Agrawal,Alok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dipak Seth Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

1.

Heard Sri Pradeep Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State authorities and Sri Saurabh Yadava, learned counsel appearing for opposite party nos. 3 and 4/GST Authorities.

2.

The petitioner has assailed the issuance of summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [here-in-after referred to as 'CGST Act'] by opposite party no. 4 at the behest of the opposite party no. 3 on the ground that the summoning authority lacks jurisdiction by virtue of Section 6 Sub-section 2(b) of the CGST Act.

3.

It appears that some Input Tax Credit for the year 2017-2018 onwards, of which the details became available to the petitioner subsequently, have been claimed by the petitioner. This claim appears to have

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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.