M/S Heavy Wires Industries Thru. Proprietor Amit Verma vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. And 2 Others - Allahabad High Court, 25 August 2025

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 803 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Respondents.

This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "i. To issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned order dated: 22.02.2025 passed by opposite party No.-3, same is contained as Annexure No.-1 to the writ petition. ii. To issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding opposite party no.3 to pass fresh order after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner."

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is proprietor of M/s Heavy Wires Industries, a firm engaged in the business of sale/purchase of barbed iron wires. The petitioner has maintained regular books of accounts. He has availed input tax credit on the strength of tax invoices issued by the supplier. The respondent no.3 issued a show cause notice under Section 74 of the U.P.G.S.T. Act on the ground that one SIB Survey was conducted on 11.08.2022 on the business premises of the petitioner and with the show cause notice issued to the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Utkarsh Misra, Abhishek Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Heavy Wires Industries Thru. Proprietor Amit Verma .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

petitioner, a demand under Section 74(5) of Rs.61,06,748/- was also made. The petitioner could not submit his reply to the said show cause notice. He was issued a reminder. He could not reply to the same as he was unaware. Now, the respondent no.3 has passed an order demanding Rs.63,24,056.24/- on the basis of certain facts revealed in the SIB Survey conducted on the business premises of the petitioner. The SIB Survey report has not been supplied to the petitioner. Had the said report been supplied to the petitioner, the petitioner would have been able to give an informed reply to the show cause notice.

Learned counsel for the State Respondents has pointed out the reminders dated 05.09.2024 issued to the petitioner asking the petitioner to file his reply latest by 10.02.2025 and to appear for personal hearing on 15.02.2025 at 11:00 am. in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Sector-5 / State Tax Office, Ayodhya. The petitioner did not appear to ask for any copy of the SIB Survey Report. The petitioner did not file his reply, as a result whereof the impugned order has been passed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, says that even in the order impugned the satisfaction that is required to be recorded for issuing demand notice has not been recorded. The order impugned is non-speaking in nature.

We have gone through the order impugned and we find that indeed no reference has been made as to how satisfaction has been arrived at. Only a mention has been mad that no reply has been submitted by the petitioner/ assessee.

The order dated 22.02.2025 is set aside only on this ground. The matter is remitted back to the respondent no.3 for decision afresh by recording his satisfaction as is required under the Act.

The SIB Survey Report be provided to the petitioner, who shall submit his reply within a period of one week from today. He shall be given a personal hearing on 04.09.2025 at 11:00 am in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Sector-5 / State Tax Office, Ayodhya. Thereafter, a fresh, reasoned and speaking order be passed by the respondent no.3 within a further period of four weeks.

The writ petition is disposed of. August 25, 2025 Rahul (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) RAHUL TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench