Devendra Construction Vs Deputy Commissioner (Uttarakhand High Court)
1. Background
In Devendra Construction Vs Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner challenged the order dated 08.07.2025, which had been passed against it under Section 74 of the UKGST Act.
Instead of pursuing the statutory appellate mechanism, the petitioner approached the Uttarakhand High Court through a writ petition.
The High Court, after hearing the parties, declined to examine the challenge on merits because the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the UKGST Act.
2. Sections Involved
Section 74 of the UKGST Act
Section 74 was the provision under which the impugned order dated 08.07.2025 was passed.
The provision deals with determination of tax where tax has not been paid, has been short-paid, or input tax credit has been wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.
However, importantly, the High Court did not examine whether the conditions of Section 74 were actually satisfied in the petitioner’s case.
There was therefore no finding by the Court regarding:
- Whether there was fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression;
- Whether the tax demand was correctly determined;
- Whether the order under Section 74 was factually or legally sustainable; or
- Whether the quantum of tax, interest or penalty was correctly computed.
Section 107 of the UKGST Act
