Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, VIVEK SARAN
Prakash Medical Stores – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue and perused the record.
2. The present writ petition has been filed to assail the order dated 05.03.2025 passed by Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal)-V, State Tax, Kanpur (respondent No.4) whereby the first appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 107 of the UP GST Act, 2017 (herein after referred to as the Act), against the ex-parte adjudication order dated 23.04.2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-27, Lakhanpur Kanpur-respondent No.3, under Section 73 of the Act for the Financial Year 2018-19, (creating demand of Tax/Cess Rs.7,81,838.98/- together with interest Rs.7,86,164/- and penalty Rs.78,184/-) has been dismissed as time barred. The remaining prayers (in the petition) have not been pressed.
3. Arising from the ex-parte adjudication order dated 23.04.2024, the petitioner first filed an application referable to Section 161 of the Act (seeking rectification in the order dated 23.04.2024), on 23.5.2024 i.e. after a month and one day. The said application was rejected by the order dated 22.10.2024, as not main
The principles of Section 14 of the Limitation Act allow for exclusion of time spent on bona fide applications, thereby justifying the filing of the appeal within the limitation period despite prior ....
The appellate authority under the APGST Act cannot condone delays beyond the one-month limit specified in Section 107(4), excluding broader provisions of the Limitation Act.
Assessment – Condonation of Delay in filing Appeal - Appellate authority is not empowered to condone the delay beyond the aggregate period of limitation - statutory appeal was barred by limitation, t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of the CGST Act prevail over the provisions of the Limitation Act, and there is no power to entertain an appeal beyond the pres....
An appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) is barred by time if not filed within the statutory period specified in the Finance Act, 1994, and requires sufficient cause for delay to be justified.
The Central Government cannot entertain a revision petition filed beyond the statutory six-month limit, regardless of claimed health reasons, emphasizing the need for strict adherence to limitation p....
The appeal was within the extended limitation period, and the Appellate Authority erred in dismissing it as time-barred without considering the merits.
The court ruled that under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, appeals must be filed within 120 days, and the court has no power to condone delays beyond th....
The application under Section 34(2) of the Act was not entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, as the appellant did not prosecute any civil proceedings in good faith and with due....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
