Allahabad High Court
M/S PMG AND ASSOCIATESversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed the writ petition, granting the petitioner a two‑week period to file the appeal and directing that the limitation objection not be raised.
Summary
M/s PMG & Associates filed a writ petition challenging an ex‑parte adjudication order dated 17 May 2024 passed under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the FY 2021‑22. The petitioner claimed it was unaware of the order and therefore could not file the statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation period, which had now expired. The respondents argued that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal and should respect the limitation. The Court, noting a similar concession granted in M/s Maa Gayatri Enterprises v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2026:AHC:190551‑DB), allowed the petitioner a two‑week window to file the appeal and ordered that no limitation objection be raised, with any deposit made against the demand to be adjusted against a required 10 % pre‑deposit. The writ petition was consequently disposed, subject to the petitioner filing the appeal within the stipulated period.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can be permitted to file a statutory appeal despite the expiry of the limitation period due to lack of knowledge of the ex‑parte adjudication order.
- Whether the Court can condone the limitation and grant a concession similar to that in a prior case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- ex‑parte adjudication
- limitation period
- statutory appeal
- condonation of delay
- UPGST Act
- tax litigation
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT TAX No. - 4000 of 2026
M/S Pmg And Associates
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Utkarsh Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Krishna Ji Shukla
Court No. - 39
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the revenue.
2. Present writ petition has been filed to challenge the ex parte adjudication order
dated 17.5.2024 passed by respondent no. 3 under Section 74 of the UPGST Act, 2017
for F.Y. 2021-22.
3. At the outset, preliminary objection has been raised by learned 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 ex parte adjudication order dated 17.5.2024, 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 dated 11.09.2026 passed in M/s Maa Gayatri Inter
Prises Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.; 2026:AHC:190551-DB, in similar
circumstances, on a fair concession made by Shri Arvind Kumar Mishra, learned
Standing Counsel and Shri Krishna Ji Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent, to
allow statutory appeals to be filed within a period of two weeks, 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. Accordingly, this writ petition is also 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 30, 2026
Prakhar
(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…