Allahabad High Court
M/S PURNIMA ENTERPRISESversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The petition was dismissed because the petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal under the U.P. GST Act.
Summary
M/S Purnima Enterprises filed a writ petition challenging an ex parte adjudication order dated 23‑02‑2025 issued under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017. The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal. The petitioners relied on earlier decisions (M/S Shree Shakti Infra and M/S Bambino Agro Industries) to argue that the order was not barred by limitation. The Court examined the availability of the appeal remedy and concluded that the petitioner indeed possessed a statutory right to appeal. Consequently, the Court declined to interfere with the adjudication order and disposed of the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can challenge the ex parte adjudication order under Section 73 of the U.P. GST Act when an appeal is statutorily available
- Whether the petition is barred by limitation
Legislation cited
Subjects
- GST
- Section 73
- adjudication order
- appeal
- limitation
- ex parte
- writ petition
- High Court
- alternative remedy
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 2431 of 2026
M/S Purnima Enterprises
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shubham
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. Challenge has been raised to the ex parte Adjudication Order dated
23.02.2025 passed under Section 73 of the U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017.
3. Preliminary objection has been raised that the petitioner has alternative
remedy of appeal.
4. On the issue of limitation, reliance has been placed on M/S Shree
Shakti Infra Vs. State of U.P. & Anr., 2026:AHC:277-DB, following
another order passed in M/S Bambino Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. State of
Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2025:AHC:229995-DB.
5. In view of the above, it appears, the petitioner has statutory remedy of
appeal available to it. Leaving that course open, interference claimed is
declined.
6. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.
(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
May 6, 2026
Shiv
Digitally signed by :-
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…