2025:UHC:10524-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 981 OF 2025 26TH NOVEMBER, 2025 M/s Doon Iron Store …… Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector -7, Dehradun and others …… Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel Counsel for the respondents : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State / respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar) 1) Petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs:- “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash / set-aside the assessment order dated 14.02.2025 passed by the respondent no. 2 (contained as Annexure No. 8 to this writ petition). II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash / set-aside the recovery citation dated 27.09.2025 issued by the respondent No. 3 (contained as Annexure No. 10 to this writ petition). 1 2025:UHC:10524-DB III. Issue any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be passed in favour of the petitioner. IV. Cost of the petition be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Tapan Singh and the learned Brief Holder for the State / respondents Ms. Puja Banga. 3) The case of the petitioner is that a discrepancy appears to have arisen due to non-capturing of GSTR-3B Entries and tax duly paid under reverse charge mechanism by the petitioner, even though those figures were correctly reflected in GSTR-3B, resulting in wrongful demand and coercive recovery. 4) Petitioner contends that, due to such discrepancy, a situation has arisen where the tax demand is more than the taxable value of the turnover / transactions undertaken by the petitioner. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a direction be issued to the Authorities to consider the case of the petitioner under Section 161 of the GST Act. 6) Learned counsel for the State/respondents would fairly submit that, in the event, there being a miscalculation or an arithmetical error on account of introduction of an additional numerical figure, the department is always open for 2 2025:UHC:10524-DB reconsideration of the same and the matter may be remitted back. 7) In view of the above statement, the petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an application under the second proviso to Section 161 of the Act, 2017 and, if such an application is made, the same shall be considered without reference to the limitation imposed under the first proviso and the same shall be considered and disposed of on merits by the A.O. Till such disposal of the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 161, there shall be no coercive action, subject to the condition that the application, invoking the provision of Section 161, shall be made within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 8) Petition stands ordered accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. _________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 26TH NOVEMBER, 2025 Negi 3 HIMANS HU NEGI Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13a af116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5 757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC 51A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C 18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.12.03 10:51:59 +05'30'