HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT TAX No. - 4001 of 2026 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J. 1. Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for the revenue and perused the record. 2. Challenge has been raised to Order in Original dated 26.3.2026 passed by respondent under Sections 74, 122 and 125 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017 for the Financial Years 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the revenue has raised a preliminary objection that the order impugned is appealable. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the period of limitation has expired. 5. Keeping in mind the fact that there is no inordinate and unexplained delay, at present, delay has been explained. 6. In face of statutory remedy of appeal being available, no occasion may exist to entertain the present writ petition. 7. On query made, if the revenue would have any serious objection on the delay aspect if the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal within limited time frame, learned counsel for revenue has raised formal objection. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation, subject to petitioner filing statutory appeal within a period of two weeks from today, the same may be entertained on merits, without raising any objection as to the limitation. September 30, 2026 Prakhar Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aditya Pandey, Himanshu Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Dhananjay Awasthi (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) M/S Malti Lawns .....Petitioner(s) Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Central Excise, Division-1, Gorakhpur .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad