M/S Manoj Steel Traderss vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Held
The Court held that a special appeal under Chapter-VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules is not maintainable if the order under challenge before the Single Judge was made in the exercise of jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of any judgment, order, or award of a Tribunal, Court, or statutory arbitrator made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of jurisdiction under any U.P. Act. In this case, the writ petition before the Single Judge concerned an order passed by an Appellate Authority under a U.P. Act, which was challenged in writ jurisdiction. Therefore, the special appeal against the Single Judge's order was held to be not maintainable. The appeal was dismissed on this procedural ground.
Facts
The appellant, M/s Manoj Steel Traderss, filed a special appeal before the Allahabad High Court against an order dated August 23, 2023, passed by a learned Single Judge. The Single Judge had dismissed the appellant's writ petition. The writ petition had challenged an order dated February 23, 2021, passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade-2 (Appeals - 4), Ghaziabad. The Appellate Authority had dismissed the appellant's appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act on the grounds that it was barred by limitation. The present appeal is a special appeal against the Single Judge's dismissal of the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether a special appeal under Chapter-VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules is maintainable against an order passed by the Single Judge in exercise of jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution, where the underlying challenge pertains to an order of an Appellate Authority under a U.P. Act. The appellant, by filing the special appeal, implicitly argued that the Single Judge's order was amenable to further appeal. The respondent, the State of U.P. and others, likely contended that the special appeal was not maintainable based on the specific provisions of the Allahabad High Court Rules. The judgment does not explicitly detail the arguments made by each side, but the court's reasoning focuses on the maintainability of the special appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:202795-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 746 of 2023 Appellant :- M/S Manoj Steel Traderss Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Vageesh Pandey,Neeraj Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.
The instant appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 23.8.2023 passed in Writ Tax No. 391 of 2021, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant/petitioner challenging the order dated 23.02.2021 passed by Additional Commissioner Grade-2 (Appeals - 4), Ghaziabad, on the ground that the appeal preferred by the petitioner before him under Section 107 of U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, was barred by limitation.
Under Chapter-VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, a special appeal would not lie if the order under challenge before Single Judge is made in exercise of jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of any judgment, order or award of a Tribunal, Court or statutory arbitrators made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of jurisdiction under any U.P. Act. 3.
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.
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.