Integrated Tech 9 Labs (P) Ltd. Vs State of U.P. & Ors. (Allahabad High Court) In case we allow the petitioner to challenge the said order in this writ petition it would amount to filing of successive writ petitions for one of the causes of action involved in the earlier writ petition. It is settled […]
S/S Patel Hardware Vs Commissioner (Allahabad High Court) Keeping in mind the fact that the delay in filing the appeal may not be condoned beyond the period of one month from the expiry of period of limitation, the phrase “communicated to such person” appearing in Section 107(1) of the Act commend a construction that would […]
Timexo Fasteners India (P.) Ltd. Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Petitioners alleged that the vehicle with the goods had entered Kanpur at 8.00 p.m. on 10.11.2018 much before the period mentioned in the e-way bill had expired which fact remains unanswered in the instructions, we are of the opinion that the seizure of […]
Non-disposal of an application for registration, by granting or refusing registration, before the expiry of six months as provided under section 12AA(2) would not result in deemed grant of registration,
Chandra Kishor Singh Vs. Director, Construction And Design Services U P Jal Nigam (Allahabad High Court) The petitioner is a contractor who has been granted a contract for construction of 100 Boys’ Hostel GIC, Pratapgarh by the Construction and Design Services U.P. Jal Nigam, respondent no.4. The parties have entered into an agreement for the […]
Abhay Traders Vs. State of U.P. & Ors (Allahabad High Court) The goods of the petitioner in transportation along with the vehicle was seized under section 129 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on 2-6-2018 for the reason that they were not accompanied by the E-way bill. The submission of learned […]
As the complete details to be filled up in Part-B of the E-way Bill were supplied on 25.05.2018, the goods were not liable for seizure on 26.05.2018.
Pr. CIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure Ltd. (Allahabad High Court) Since the time limit for filing the revised return had not expired during the relevant year, therefore, claim for deduction under section 80-IA if not made earlier could have been made in the revised return. Once it could have been claimed in the revised return under […]
Against the order dated 30.11.2017 the petitioner has an statutory efficacious alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 109 A of the Rules.
Petitioner has equally efficacious remedy of filing an appeal against the penalty order under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017. It is left open to the petitioner to take recourse to the statutory remedy available to him under the law. We are not inclined to entertain this petition at this stage.
