Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 187837 (ALL)

M/S MANUJ ENTERPRISES THRU. AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SULABH SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. INSTITUTIONAL FINANCE LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

/1494/2025 · 2025-12-16

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT TAX No. - 1494 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia seeking the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI thereby quashing the impugned orders dated 18.01.2025 & 18.01.2025 passed by Opposite Party No.2 / Deputy Commissioner, Lucknow, Sector- 20, Zone-II, Lucknow (C), Lucknow-II-UP, and order dated 01 08.2025, passed by Opposite Party No.3 /Commercial Tax Officer, Lucknow, Sector-20, Zone-II, Lucknow (C), Lucknow-II-U P., thereby rejecting the claim of Input Tax Credit amount of total Rs. 89573/- As contained in Annexure No. 1, 2 & 3 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS thereby commanding and directing the Opposite Parties to make payment of the Input Tax Credit amount of Rs. 89573/- to the petitioner alongwith 18% interest, forthwith or as directed by this Hon'ble High Court, within stipulated period, in the interest of justice." 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the orders were passed without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. In light of the same, we find that there is violation of principles of natural justice. 5. Upon perusal of the documents and after hearing the counsels appearing for the parties, we are of the view that a hearing should have been granted to the petitioner with regard to the refund claimed by the petitioner. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Misra, Shashin Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. M/S Manuj Enterprises Thru. Authorized Signatory Sulabh Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Institutional Finance Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside with a direction upon the authorities concerned to de novo decide the matter after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of twelve weeks from date. 7. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. December 16, 2025 Lokesh Kumar WTAX No. 1494 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench