SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 2794

PIYUSH AGRAWAL
K. C. Flour Mill – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Aditya Bhushan Singhal, Aditya Pandey
For the Respondents: C.S.C.

Table of Content
1. ex parte assessment and appeals process (Para 3 , 4)
2. arguments against condonation of appeal delay (Para 5 , 6)
3. standard for condonation of governmental delays (Para 7 , 9)
4. court's duty to scrutinize delay justification (Para 12 , 15)
5. writ petition granted; order set aside (Para 17)

JUDGMENT

Piyush Agrawal, J.

Heard Mr. Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rishi Kumar learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

2. By means of present petition petitioner is seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.3.2020 passed by respondent no. 2 in Second Appeal Defective No. 01 of 2018 (A.Y. 2013-14), Commissioner Commercial Tax v. M/s K.C. Flour Mill, under the provisions of Section 57 (6) of UP VAT Act, 2008 (herein after referred to as 'the Act').

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was Proprietorship firm running flour mill in the name of M/s K.C. Flour Mill and engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of Atta, Maida and Sooji. In normal course of business, the petitioner had deposited the admitted due tax for the assessment year in question. He submits that initially an ex-parte as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top