M/S TATA STEEL CENTRE v. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS
WTAX/4380/2025 · 2025-09-24
Prashant Bilgaiyan Registrar J Criminal, Shekhar B Saraf
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 89812 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 89812 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT TAX No. - 4380 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Ankur Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State respondents and Sri Abrar Ahmad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India.
2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has sought for the following substantial relief:
"Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notice dated 21.9.2020 and its reminder dated 21.10.2021 and exparte order dated 23.12.2021 passed by respondent no.4 contained in (Annexure no.6, 7, 8 and 9) of writ petition."
3. Upon perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the said order has been passed subsequent to the cancellation of registration of the petitioner. Furthermore, it appears that the order impugned has been passed ex parte, behind the back of the petitioner, and thereafter, order has not been served upon the petitioner.
4. In light of the same, we are of the view that the principles of natural justice have not been complied with by the authorities. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 23.12.2021 is quashed and set aside with a direction upon the authorities to provide a copy of the show cause notice to the petitioner, and thereafter, allow the petitioner to file its reply within Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohit Behari Mathur Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Abrar Ahmad, C.S.C., Dhananjay Awasthi, Parv Agarwal M/S Tata Steel Centre .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
four weeks. Subsequent to the same, opportunity of personal hearing should be granted to the petitioner, and thereafter, reasoned order should be passed in accordance with law. We make it clear that the petitioner shall not seek any adjournment in the matter.
5. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. September 25, 2025 Kuldeep WTAX No. 4380 of 2025 2 (Praveen Kumar Giri,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- KULDEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad