Case Title | Shikhar Constructions VS State Of Uttar Pradesh |
Court | Allahabad High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal Justice Irshad Ali |
Citation | 2019 (10) GSTPanacea 46 HC Allahabad Misc. Bench No. 28451 Of 2019 |
Judgement Date | 17-October-2019 |
In a legal proceeding, Sri S.K. Tiwari, representing the petitioner, and Sri H.P. Srivastava, representing the respondents, presented their arguments. Tiwari, on behalf of the petitioner, pointed out that although the contested order falls under the purview of appeal according to Section 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the absence of a functioning Appellate Tribunal in the State of U.P. at the moment necessitated the filing of the present writ petition instead.
The counsel representing the petitioner has asserted that their client is fully prepared to comply with the requirements outlined in the impugned order, including the payment of taxes, interest, fines, fees, and penalties, as mandated by Section 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This compliance is a prerequisite for initiating an appeal process. The petitioner’s counsel has requested a period of fifteen days to fulfill these conditions and to furnish proof of payment as per the stipulations of Section 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel has been granted by the court. This means that the petitioner has been permitted to fulfill the terms and conditions outlined in Section 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, including the submission of receipts confirming the payment of taxes, interest, fines, fees, and penalties within the requested fifteen-day timeframe.
However, a crucial condition has been laid out by the court: if the petitioner fails to adhere to these terms and conditions and does not submit the required receipts within the specified period, the present writ petition will be dismissed by the court without further deliberation.
The court has further directed that the case be listed for immediate review after the expiration of the fifteen-day period, indicating a swift follow-up to monitor compliance with the court’s directives.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case: