Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45764 Court No. - 13 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 123 of 2025 Applicant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ( Insutitutional Finance ) Lko. And 2 Others Opposite Party :- M/S Nath Agency Office Thru. Proprietorrajendra Prasad Gupta Gstin - 090zpg6808fizf Counsel for Applicant :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. (I.A. No.1 of 2025) 1. Heard. 2. This is application seeking condonation of delay in filing the review application. 3. The review application is being filed with a delay of 444 days as on 19.07.2025. 4. Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application is sufficient. 5. The delay condonation application is allowed and delay in filing the review application is hereby condoned. (Order on petition) 1. Heard Shri Yogesh Chandra Bhatt, the learned State Counsel and Shri Sanjay Sareen, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. 2. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioners'- State is seeking a review of a judgement and order dated 02.04.2024 passed by this Court in Writ Tax No.181 of 2023 whereby the writ petition filed challenging an order dated 24.01.2023 passed by the Additional Commissioner State Tax, Sector-1, Balrampur directing the petitioner to pay interest on C.G.S.T. and S.G.S.T., was quashed on the ground that although proceedings under Section 73 of U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act had been initiated against the petitioner but the same had been dropped by means of an order dated 21.11.2022. The demand of interest was being raised on the same amount, the demand in respect of which had already been dropped. 3. This fact could not be disputed by the Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel at the time of decision of the writ petition and even now, this fact is not being disputed by the State-petitioner. Review of the order dated 02.04.2024 has been sought on the ground that the petitioner had admitted his liability under Section 61 of the aforesaid Act. 4. When the State had dropped the proceedings instituted under Section 73 of U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, this Court did not commit any error, much less an error which may be said to be apparent on the record, in setting aside the order for recovery of interest on an amount, the proceedings for recovery whereof already stood dropped by the State. 5. In these circumstances, this court is of the considered view that in absence of any error pointed out in the order dated 02.04.2024 which is apparent on the record, there is no ground for review of the order dated 02.04.2024. 6. The review application lacks merit and the same is dismissed accordingly. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 6.8.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench