Allahabad High Court
AFFINITY COMSOL PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The petition is disposed, granting the petitioner a two‑week window to file the statutory appeal, which will be entertained on its merits without a limitation objection.
Summary
Affinity Comsol Private Limited filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 28‑08‑2024 issued by the State under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 for the FY 2019‑2020. The petitioner argued that it was unaware of the order and therefore could not file the statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation period, which had now expired. The State contended that the petitioner still had a statutory remedy of appeal. The Court, noting a similar concession granted in Writ Tax No. 2889 of 2026, allowed the petitioner to file the appeal within two weeks from the date of the order and directed that the appeal be heard on its merits without a limitation objection. The petition was consequently disposed, with a direction that any deposit made against the disputed demand may be adjusted against a required 10% pre‑deposit.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the limitation period on the petitioner's statutory right to appeal the order under Section 73 of the UP GST Act, 2017?
- Whether the Court can condone the limitation period and permit the filing of the appeal despite the expiry of the prescribed time.
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 — s. 73
Subjects
- GST
- Section 73
- limitation period
- appeal
- statutory remedy
- writ petition
- High Court
- pre‑deposit
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 3730 of 2026
Affinity Comsol Private Limited
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aryan Mishra, Ayush Kumar, Gaurav
Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 39
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard Shri Aryan Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rishi
Kumar, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
2. Present writ petition has been filed to challenge the order dated
28.08.2024 passed by respondent no. 2 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for Financial Year 2019-2020.
3. At the outset, preliminary objection has been raised by learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel that the petitioner has statutory remedy of appeal.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner states that owing to
lack of knowledge of the order dated 28.08.2024, the petitioner could not
avail its statutory remedy of appeal, within limitation. At present the
petitioner is disabled from filing appeal as the maximum period for which
delay may be condoned, has expired.
5. By a separate order passed today in Writ Tax No. 2889 of 2026, in similar
circumstances, on a fair confession made by the State, to allow statutory
appeals to be filed within a period of two weeks from today, that writ
petition has been disposed of.
6. In view of similar concession made in the present facts, no further
adjudication is required in the facts of this case. The writ petition is
disposed of with the observation, subject to the petitioner availing statutory
remedy of appeal within a period of two weeks from today, the said appeal
may be entertained on its own merits without raising any objection as to
limitation, keeping in mind the stand of the State, noticed above.
7. Any amount that may have been deposited against the disputed demand
may be adjusted against the requirement to make pre deposit of 10% of the
disputed demand of tax, penalty etc.
September 11,
2026
Bhanu (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…