M/S Anil Agency vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Ors
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition was effectively terminated by the order passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 25291 of 2019. The Supreme Court's common order was intended to cover all cases of seizure during the relevant period, to ensure consistency in the application of law and to avoid multiple appeals. The Court noted that the petitioner's counsel sought permission to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal, and the State had no objection if such remedy was availed in accordance with law. Therefore, the Court dismissed the present petition, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Anil Agency, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging a seizure order (No. 434 dated 15.02.2018) and a consequential notice (No. 433 dated 15.02.2018) passed by respondent no. 4 under Sections 129(1) and 129(3) respectively of the U.P. GST Act, 2017. The State, represented by the Standing Counsel, submitted that the issue had been considered by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 25291 of 2019. The Supreme Court had passed a common order in similar matters, deeming all pending writ petitions before the High Court as disposed of accordingly. The petitioner's counsel then sought permission to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present writ petition stands concluded by the order passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 25291 of 2019, thereby rendering the High Court proceedings infructuous. The petitioner argued that they should be permitted to institute and/or pursue the statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned seizure order and consequential notice. The revenue (State) did not object to this, provided the statutory remedy was availed in accordance with law. The core issue revolved around the impact of the Supreme Court's order on the pending writ petition and the petitioner's right to pursue alternative remedies.
Sections Cited
Section 129(1), Section 129(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 352 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S Anil Agency Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishi Raj Kapoor Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Rishi Raj Kapoor, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.C. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Present petition has been filed for the following relief: "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the Seizure order No. 434 dated 15.02.2018 (Annexure No. 5 of this Writ Petition) passed by respondent no.4 under Section 129(1) of the U.P. GST Act 2017 and consequential notice No. 433 dated 15.02.2018, issued by respondent no. 4 under Section 129(3) of U.P. GST Act, 2017 (Annexure No.6 of this writ petition)."
At the outset, learned Standing Counsel for the State has submitted that in identical matter the issue travelled to the Supreme Court as Special Leave Petition (C) No.25291 of 2019, wherein the Supreme Court passed the following order: "In view of this order, all the Writ Petitions pending before the High Court, list whereof has been furnished in the affidavit
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.