M/S JINDAL METAL CO. AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                          WRIT TAX No. - 2198 of 2026

M/S Jindal Metal Co. And Another
                                                                    .....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus

Union Of India And 3 Others
                                                                  .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)          : Ishita Farsaiya
Counsel for Respondent(s)          : A.S.G.I., Dhananjay Awasthi, Saumitra
                                     Singh

Court No. - 3
                HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
                HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

1. Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms.
Ishita Farsaiya, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dhananjay
Awasthi, learned counsel for the revenue.

2. Challenge has been raised to the Adjudication Order dated 22.12.2025
passed by respondent no.4 under Section 74 and Section 122 of the CGST
Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

3. On 22.04.2026, we have passed the below quoted order:-

     "1. Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms.
     Ishita Farsaiya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dhananjay
     Awasthi, learned counsel for the revenue.

     2. Besides other submissions, it has been strenuously urged that the case
     of the petitioner is not being considered to any extent. Though reply was
     filed in response to the show-cause notice and the statement of the
     petitioner firm was recorded and those facts find narration in the order,
     while dismissing the individual case of the petitioner, no recital exists of
     the explanation furnished by the petitioner. Only conclusion has been
     reached, confirming the demand of penalty.

     3. It is also informed that similar cases arising from the same impugned
     order are also pending.
                                                               WTAX No. 2198 of 2026
                                   2


     4. Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the revenue prays for and
     is granted ten days' time to obtain clear written instructions and/or file
     counter affidavit.

     5. Put up as fresh on 05.05.2026 alongwith Writ Tax No. 1708 of 2026.

     6. Till the next date of listing, operation and effect of the impugned order
     dated 22.12.2025 shall remain stayed insofar as it relates to the present
     petitioner."

4. Today, upon instructions, Sri Dhananjay Awasthi states that in view of
such ground being pressed and further in view of the fact that in case of
co-noticees, the matter has been remitted to the Adjudicating Authority,
similar result may obtain in the present petition, as well.

5. In view of the above noted fact, no useful purpose may be served in
keeping the present writ petition pending or calling for counter affidavit at
this stage. The writ petition is disposed of on following terms:-

(i) The impugned order dated 22.12.2025 is set aside and the matter is
remitted to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order.

(ii) For that purpose, the Adjudicating Authority may issue to the petitioner,
a fresh copy of the original Show-Cause notice together with copies of
RUDs and a list of non-RUDs. That compliance may be made within a
period of two weeks from today.

(iii) Upon receipt of such communication, the petitioner may apply to the
Adjudicating Authority to be supplied any other document including copies
of non-RUDs, within a further period of one week therefrom.

(iv) Subject to such compliance, the application moved by the petitioner may
be considered by the Adjudicating Authority within a further period of one
week. Copies of all other documents to be supplied to the petitioner may be
made available within that time. If copy of any document or non-RUD, is to
be declined, adequate reasons may be communicated to the petitioner, within
that time.

(v) Thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority may fix appropriate date in the
                                                                                            WTAX No. 2198 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    proceeding with at least 15 days advance notice. The petitioner undertakes to
                                    cooperate in the proceedings and not seek any undue or long adjournment.

                                    (vi) At that stage, if the revenue seeks to rely on statement of any person,
                                    recorded during investigation etc., the same would necessarily be made
                                    available to the petitioner on the date fixed in the proceedings. On that
                                    date itself, the petitioner may apply for opportunity to cross-examine any
                                    witness being relied by the revenue.

                                    (vii) Wherever the revenue seeks to rely on adverse statement made
                                    against the petitioner, normally opportunity of cross-examination, if
                                    prayed for, may be allowed to the petitioner. If such opportunity is to be
                                    declined, adequate reasons for the same may be communicated to the
                                    petitioner within a week of its application.

                                    (viii) Accordingly, the proceedings may continue such that the same may
                                    be concluded within a period of six months from today, after affording
                                    due opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.



                                                     (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
                                    May 5, 2026
                                    #Vikram/-




Digitally signed by :-
VIKRAM GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad