Ganga Brick Field Umraipurwa Vs Additional Commissioner (Allahabad High Court)
The writ petition was filed challenging two orders dated 31 July 2025 and 15 October 2024 passed by the authorities. With the consent of both sides, the Court proceeded to decide the petition without calling for affidavits. The petitioner argued that its business premises were surveyed on 27 May 2024, and based on that survey, proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 of the GST Act were initiated. It was contended that the authorities should have proceeded under Sections 73 or 74, and therefore the proceedings under Section 130 were unsustainable. The petitioner relied on several earlier judgments of the High Court, including Vijay Trading Company and PP Polyplast Private Limited, both of which were subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court. These judgments held that proceedings under Section 130 cannot be invoked merely because excess stock is found at the time of survey.
The State’s counsel did not dispute the legal position established in these judgments. After reviewing the matter, the Court noted that the survey had revealed alleged discrepancies, leading to initiation of proceedings under Section 130 and Section 122. The Court then referred to Section 35 of the GST Act, which requires registered persons to maintain true and correct accounts. Section 35(6) states that if goods are not properly accounted for, the Proper Officer must determine the tax payable and apply Sections 73 or 74 for such determination.
