M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 Others

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by allowing the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal within a period of two weeks from the date of the order. The Court directed that the appeal, if filed within this period, should be entertained on its own merits without any objection as to limitation, taking into consideration the stand of the State. Any amount already deposited or recovered against the disputed demand was to be adjusted against the requirement of making a pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed demand of tax, penalty, etc. The Court did not decide the merits of the adjudication order itself, but rather facilitated the petitioner's access to the appellate forum. The issue of the validity of the ex parte adjudication order was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s New Sana Brick Field, filed a writ petition challenging an ex parte Adjudication Order dated August 20, 2024, passed by respondent no. 2 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act, 2017, for the financial year 2019-2020. The revenue raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of a statutory remedy of appeal. The petitioner contended that due to a lack of knowledge of the adjudication order, they could not file an appeal within the prescribed limitation period, and the maximum period for condoning the delay had expired. The Court noted a similar case, M/s Maa Gayatri Inter Prises Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., where a writ petition was disposed of by allowing statutory appeals to be filed within two weeks, based on a concession from the State.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner can be granted relief by this Court despite the existence of a statutory remedy of appeal, given that the limitation period for filing such an appeal has expired? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 73 of the UP GST Act, 2017, and principles of condonation of delay). Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that due to lack of knowledge of the ex parte adjudication order, they were unable to avail the statutory remedy of appeal within the limitation period. They are now disabled from filing an appeal as the maximum period for condoning delay has passed. Revenue: Raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal.