Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55098 (ALL)

M/S PRISM THERMOFORMERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WTAX/2119/2025 · 2025-05-07

Arun Bhansali, Kshitij Shailendra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74823-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2119 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Prism Thermoformers Respondent :- State of U.P. and 2 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nishant Mishra, Vedika Nath Counsel for Respondent :- Nimai Dass, A.C.S.C. Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. Having heard Ms. Vedika Nath and Sri Nishant Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nimai Dass, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, it remains undisputed that the petitioner's registration under the UPGST Act, 2017 was cancelled on 25.02.2021 w.e.f. 30.12.2020 It is not the case of the revenue that the said registration has ever been revived or that the petitioner ever sought revival of that registration. 2. In view of the above, it does merit acceptance that the petitioner was not obligated to visit the GST portal to receive the show cause notices that may have been issued to the petitioner for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 through e-mode, preceding the adjudication orders dated 24.04.2024, 31.07.2024 and 02.12.2023 passed in pursuance thereto. 3. It is also not the case of the revenue that any physical/offline notice was issued to or served on the petitioner before the impugned order came to be passed. 4. In view of peculiar facts noted above, no useful purpose may be served in keeping the petition pending or calling counter affidavit at this stage or to relegate the present petitioner to the forum of alternative remedy. 5. Since essential requirement of rules of natural justice has remained to be fulfilled, we set aside the orders dated 24.04.2024, 31.07.2024 and 02.12.2023. The petitioner may treat the said order itself to be the notice and submit its final reply thereto within a period of four weeks from today. Subject to such compliance by the petitioner, fresh order may be passed after affording opportunity of personal hearing, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months therefrom. 6. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Sazia (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad