Allahabad High Court
RENEWABLE ENERGYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The petition is disposed, granting the petitioner a two‑week period to file the statutory appeal, which will be entertained on its merits without a limitation objection.
Summary
The petitioners, Renewable Energy, challenged an order dated 30‑12‑2025 issued by the State under Section 73 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 for FY 2021‑22, arguing that they were unaware of the order and thus missed the statutory time limit for filing an appeal. The State contended that the petitioners had a statutory remedy of appeal and raised a preliminary objection on that ground. The Court noted a similar concession granted in Writ Tax No. 2889 of 2026, where the State allowed a two‑week window to file the appeal. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing that the petitioners may file the appeal within two weeks from the date of the order, and that the appeal will be heard on its merits without any limitation objection. The Court also directed that any amount already deposited may be adjusted against the required 10% pre‑deposit of the disputed demand.
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 allow the appeal to be filed beyond the prescribed time?
Legislation cited
- Uttar Pradesh GST Act, 2017 — s. 73
Subjects
- limitation
- appeal
- GST
- Section 73
- writ petition
- High Court
- pre‑deposit
- tax
- penalty
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 3737 of 2026
Renewable Energy
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aman Kumar Dwivedi, Parul Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 39
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard Shri Aman Kumar Dwivedi, 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
30.12.2025 passed by respondent no. 2 under Section 73 of the UP GST Act,
2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for Financial Year 2021-2022.
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 30.12.2025, 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…