HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 207 of 2022 and SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 211 of 2022 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned ACSC. Revision No. 207 of 2022 has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 24.12.2021 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal Bench-3 Varanasi in Second Appeal No. 51 of 2020 for the assessment year 2010-11 in the proceedings under section 28(2)(ii) read with section 32 of the Value Added Tax Act and Revision No. 207 of 2022 has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal Bench-3 Varanasi in Second Appal No. 52 of 2020 for the assessment year 2010-11 in the proceedings under section 48(5) of the Value Added Tax. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that since the writ petition being Writ Tax No. 849 of 2022 filed by the petitioner - revisionist has been allowed by the order dated 16.9.2025 by setting aside the order allowing the condonation of delay in filing the appeals, the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. He further submits that once the order has been set aside subsequent impugned orders passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. To the last submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned ACSC could not dispute the said fact. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. It is not in dispute that the impugned orders have been passed after condoning the delay in approaching the Tribunal. It is further not in dispute the order condoning the delay has been set aside in Writ Tax No. 849 of 2022 by the order dated 16.9.2025. Once the delay condoning orders itself have been set aside the subsequent orders Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Aditya Pandey, Bipin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : C.S.C. S/S Deep Jyoti Electronics .....Revisionist(s) The Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow .....Opposite Party(s) passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed. In turn, both the revisions preferred by the revisionist are allowed and the orders passed to that extent are quashed. September 16, 2025 samz STRE No. 207 of 2022 2 (Piyush Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED AKHTARMOHAMMAD MEQDAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad