Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 168366 (ALL)

RAZA STEEL CORPORATION THRU.PROPRIETOR ABOOBAKAR SIDDIQUI v. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER,GRADE-2ND APPEAL,STATE TAX,JUDICIAL DIVISION,IV,LUCKNOW AND ANOTHER

WTAX/1087/2025 · 2025-09-26

Pankaj Bhatia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 1087 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 17.9.2024 passed under Section 74 of the GST Act as well as the order dated 22.9.2025 whereby the appeal was dismissed as being beyond limitation. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no opportunity of hearing was granted while passing the order under Section 74. 4. Learned Standing Counsel, based upon instructions, states that in the show-cause notice, prior date was mentioned for personal hearing than the date of filing of the reply. 5. It is argued that the said issue was dealt with by this Court in Writ Tax No.303 of 2024 (Mahaveer Trading Company vs. Deputy Commissioner, State Tax and Anr.) vide judgment dated 04.03.2024. 6. On the said sole ground, following the judgment in the case of Mahaveer Trading Company (supra), present petition is allowed. 7. Orders dated 17.9.2024 & 22.9.2025 are quashed. 8. Matter is remanded to the assessing authority to pass fresh order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. September 26, 2025 J. K. Dinkar Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shujat Kidwai, Farhan Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Raza Steel Corporation Thru.Proprietor Aboobakar Siddiqui .....Petitioner(s) Additional Commissioner,Grade-2nd Appeal,State Tax,Judicial Division,Iv,Lucknow And Another .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench