Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16871 (UTT)

M/S CHATURVEDI AGENCIES v. COMMISSIONER

WPMB/1075/2025 · 2025-12-24

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:11561-DB SL. No. Dat e Of f ice Not es, r ep or t s, or d er s or p r oceed in g s or d ir ect ion s an d Reg ist r ar ’s or d er w it h Sig n at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PMB 1 0 7 5 / 2 0 2 5 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Hon ’ble Su bh ash Upadh yay, J. Mr. Tarun Pande, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Pooja Banga, Brief Holder, for the State. (2) Petitioner is a taxable person registered with Uttarakhand GST. He is challenging the order dated 14.12.2024, passed by Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Tanakpur and also the rectification order dated 19.7.2025. Reliefs sought in the writ petition are as under: “a. issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash and set aside the Impugned Order in Original dated 14/ 12/ 2023 (Annexure No. 1) as well as the subsequent Rectification Order issued in Form DRC-08 dated 19/ 07/ 2025 (Annexure No. 2) passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 161 read with Section 73, 50, and 122 of the Act, whereby the total demand has been enhanced to Rs. 11,67,386.00/ -, as the same have been passed in utter disregard to the principles of natural justice; b. issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing Respondent No. 2 to re-decide the matter after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners and after considering all the submissions and documents; ” (3) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that identical issue has been decided by coordinate Bench in Writ 2025:UHC:11561-DB Petition (M/ B) No. 123 of 2025. He subm its that present writ petition also deserves to be decided in terms of the judgment rendered in the said writ petition. (4) Learned State Counsel fairly submits that issue involved in this writ petition is identical, therefore writ petition can be decided in terms of the judgment rendered in Writ Petition (M/ B) No. 123 of 2025. (5) In view of the consensus between learned Counsel for the parties, writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment rendered in Writ Petition (M/ B) No. 123 of 2025. ( Su bh ash Upadh y ay , J.) ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 2 4 .1 2 .2 0 2 5 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3a eab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052 DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2025.12.24 14:09:56 +05'30' 2025:UHC:11561-DB