M/S BADSHAH TRADERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                       WRIT TAX No. - 2242 of 2026

M/S Badshah Traders
                                                           .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                         .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                     :   Akhil Agnihotri
Counsel for Respondent(s)                     :   C.S.C.

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

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State respondents.

2. Instructions have been received by learned Standing Counsel. No
contrary fact has been reported.

3. Briefly it has to be considered if the adjudication order dated
21.02.2025 arising from show cause notice dated 05.08.2024 suffers from
patent illegality resulting in complete denial of opportunity to object or
being heard in the adjudication proceedings. Undeniably, the petitioner's
registration stood suspended by order dated 09.07.2025. Thereafter the
show cause notice was first issued to the petitioner through electronic
mode, by uploading it on the Common Portal.

4. It is the own case of the respondents, as noted in M/S Bambino Agro
Industries Ltd. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.;
2025:AHC:229995-DB, that in cases where registration may have been
cancelled, such persons may be proceeded in adjudication proceedings
only against service of physical notice.The circular providing for such
measure follows the dictate of common sense. Once the registration is
cancelled and the registered persons thus disabled from working on the
Common Portal and in any case, are relieved of obligation to check the
Common Portal thereafter, it is wholly natural and practical that any
adjudication notice issued after cancellation of registration may be served
through physically in terms of the provisions of Section 169 (1) (a) (b) of
                                                                                            WTAX No. 2242 of 2026
                                                                    2


                                    the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017.

                                    5. Here too, no such physical notice had been issued or served on the
                                    petitioner, rules of natural justice are seen to have been substantially
                                    violated as may have prevented the petitioner from filing any
                                    objection/reply to such show cause notice.

                                    6. In view of that breach of essential principles of natural justice noted, no
                                    useful purpose may be served in keeping the present writ petition pending
                                    or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. Primarily, the petitioner's
                                    right to be heard is statutorily protected under Section 75 (4) of the said
                                    Act.

                                    7. Accordingly, the impugned adjudication order dated 21.02.2025 is set
                                    aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent no.2 to pass a fresh
                                    order strictly in accordance with law.

                                    8. For that purpose, we further provide the said respondent may issue a
                                    fresh notice to the petitioner through physical mode, along with copies of
                                    Relied Upon Documents ('RUDs' in short) within a period of ten days
                                    from today.

                                    9. Subject to such compliance, the petitioner shall have two weeks
                                    therefrom to file his written reply through physical mode and thereafter
                                    the respondent no.2 may fix appropriate date for hearing in the
                                    proceedings with at least 15 days advance notice. Subject to that
                                    compliance, the petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the proceedings and
                                    not seek any adjournment. Thereafter the proceedings may be concluded
                                    not later than two months from the date of filing of reply by the petitioner.



                                                     (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
                                    May 7, 2026
                                    Prakhar




Digitally signed by :-
PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad