The Allahabad High Court held that GST appellate authorities cannot dismiss appeals solely on limitation without examining the actual date of communication of orders. The Court ruled that the burden lies on the Revenue to rebut an assessee’s declared date of communication with cogent evidence.
The Court held that penal interest could not be imposed after the petitioner had paid the admitted dues and the earlier dismissal order had been recalled. The ruling turned on the specific facts of the case and was declared non-precedential.
The Allahabad High Court held that persons illegally detained beyond permissible limits are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 25,000 per day. The Court directed that such compensation be recovered from the salaries of erring officials after disciplinary proceedings.
The Court refused to entertain a writ petition challenging a GST assessment order after the limitation period for filing a statutory appeal had lapsed. It held that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass prescribed appellate remedies.
The Court held that retention of seized cash beyond six months is illegal if the extension order under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act is not communicated to the affected person within the statutory period. The ruling reinforces that procedural safeguards protecting taxpayers cannot be ignored.
The Court set aside a GST demand order after finding that the personal hearing was scheduled before the last date for filing a reply. The ruling underscores that statutory hearing requirements cannot be reduced to a procedural formality.
Saurabh Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) The Allahabad High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the order dated 30.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Division-I, Lucknow, whereby a penalty of ₹38,12,904 was imposed upon the petitioner under Section 122(1)(A) of the CGST Act, 2017. The case arose […]
The High Court granted bail in a POCSO case after noting that the victim did not support the prosecution story in her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The Court also considered the filing of the charge sheet and the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents.
The Allahabad High Court held that a taxpayer cannot effectively respond to a show cause notice without access to the documents relied upon by the department. The order under Section 74 was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Allahabad High Court quashed GST registration cancellation and revocation rejection orders after finding that hearing dates were fixed before the expiry of the reply period. The Court held that such notices deny a meaningful opportunity of hearing and violate natural justice.
