M/S NEW CALCUTTA MACHINERY STORESversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT TAX No. - 2437 of 2026

M/S New Calcutta Machinery Stores
                                                                .....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus

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

Counsel for Petitioner(s)             :   Sunil Kumar Yadav, Vishwjeet
Counsel for Respondent(s)             :   C.S.C.

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

1. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel for the State respondents, briefly it has to be considered if the
adjudication orders dated 23.04.2024 and 22.08.2024 arising from show
cause notices dated 25.12.2023 and 31.05.2024 suffer from patent illegality
resulting in complete denial of opportunity to object or being heard in the
adjudication proceedings. Undeniably, the petitioner's registration stood
cancelled by order dated 16.12.2023. Thereafter the show cause notice was
first issued to the petitioner through electronic mode, by uploading it on the
Common Portal.

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

3. To the extent, no such physical notice has been issued or served on the
petitioner, rules of natural justice are seen to have been substantially violated
                                                                                              WTAX No. 2437 of 2026
                                                                         2


                                    as may have prevented the petitioner from filing any objection/reply to such
                                    show cause notice.

                                    4. 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.

                                    5. Accordingly, the impugned adjudication orders dated 23.04.2024 and
                                    22.08.2024 are set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent no. 2 to
                                    pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law.

                                    6. 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.

                                    7. 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.

                                    8. The present petition is disposed of.



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




Digitally signed by :-
ABHILASH SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad