Allahabad High Court
M/S VK CONSTRUCTIONSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The Court allowed the petitioner to file the statutory appeal within two weeks and disposed of the writ petition.
Summary
M/S Vk Constructions filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 16‑08‑2023 issued under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 for the FY 2022‑23, alleging it could not file a statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation due to lack of knowledge of the order. The State argued that a statutory remedy of appeal existed. The Court noted a similar concession granted in Writ Tax No. 2889 of 2026, wherein the State allowed a two‑week window to file appeals. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to file the appeal within two weeks, and held that the appeal would be heard on its merits without any limitation objection. Any deposit already made could be adjusted against the required 10% pre‑deposit of the disputed demand.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can be permitted to file a statutory appeal beyond the limitation period on the ground of lack of knowledge of the order.
- Whether the High Court can condone the limitation period by following a concession granted in a similar writ petition.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- GST
- Section 73
- limitation
- appeal
- statutory remedy
- writ petition
- condonation
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 3734 of 2026
M/S Vk Constructions
.....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
16.08.2023 passed by respondent no. 2 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for Financial Year 2022-2023.
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 16.08.2023, 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…