Case tittle | Mongia Steel Limited And Another VS State Of U. P. And Others |
court | Allahabad high court |
Honourable judge | Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal Judge J.J. Munir |
Citation | 2023 (01) GSTPanacea 294 HC Allahabad WRIT TAX No. – 1077 Of 2018 |
Judgment date | 05-January-2023 |
The present writ petition seeks the annulment of proceedings instigated following a notice dated February 13, 2018, regarding the detention of a vehicle transporting goods. Additionally, the petitioner urges for the finalization of the proceedings concerning the reimbursement of tax funds submitted by them before any decision is made.
The respondents, in their counter affidavit, contend that the petitioner did not provide any explanation. They assert that the proceedings were concluded with the issuance of an order under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on February 18, 2018. Furthermore, it’s noted that the petitioner could have appealed this order under Section 107 of the same Act.
Given these circumstances, it is concluded that there is no valid contention in the present petition as the order was issued against the petitioner on February 18, 2018. Thus, the petitioner had ample opportunity to appeal the decision under the aforementioned section.
The petition at hand seeks the quashing of proceedings initiated following a notice dated February 13, 2018, regarding the detention of a vehicle transporting goods. Additionally, it requests that proceedings initiated for the refund of a tax amount deposited by the petitioner be concluded before any order is passed. However, the respondents argue in their counter affidavit that the petitioner failed to provide any explanation. The proceedings were ultimately concluded with an order under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on February 18, 2018. The petitioner had the option to appeal this order under Section 107 of the same Act.
In consideration of these facts, the court finds that as the order was passed against the petitioner on February 18, 2018, they had the appropriate remedy to challenge it by filing an appeal. Moreover, once a demand has been raised against the petitioner following the competent authority’s order, there is no basis for refunding the amount unless the order is overturned. Therefore, the court dismisses the present petition.
Download PDF:
Mongia Steel Limited And Another
For Reference Visit:
Allahabad High Court
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case law