Allahabad High Court
MITHILESH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within two weeks and refusing to entertain any limitation objection.
Summary
Mithilesh Kumar Singh filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 04‑08‑2023 issued by the State under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 for the FY 2020‑21, alleging that he could not file a statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation period. The State argued that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal, while the petitioner claimed lack of knowledge of the order prevented timely filing and that the period for condoning delay had expired. The Court noted a similar concession granted in Writ Tax No. 2889 of 2026, where the State allowed filing of appeals within two weeks. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition, directing that the petitioner may file the appeal within two weeks from the date of the order and that the appeal will be heard on its merits without a limitation objection. Any deposit made against the disputed demand may be adjusted against the 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?
- Can the Court condone the limitation and permit the filing of the appeal within a two‑week period?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- GST
- Uttar Pradesh GST Act
- Section 73
- statutory appeal
- limitation period
- writ petition
- pre‑deposit
- tax assessment
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 3732 of 2026
Mithilesh Kumar Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rishi Raj Kapoor
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 39
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard Shri Rishi Raj Kapoor, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri
Arvind Mishra, learned counsel for the revenue.
2. Present writ petition has been filed to challenge the order dated
04.08.2023 passed by respondent no. 2 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for Financial Year 2020-2021.
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 04.08.2023, 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…