CONSULTEASE.COM

Sign In

Browse By

Allahabad HC in the case of Ranchi Carrying Corporation Versus The State Of U.P.

Case Covered:

Ranchi Carrying Corporation

Versus

The State Of U.P.

Facts of the Case:

The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

“I. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 05.08.2020 passed by respondent no.2 in Appeal No. KNP3/GST/055/2020 the Assessment Year 2019-20 under the provisions of section 130 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act in relation to the goods.

II. Issue a suitable writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 23.01.2020 Form GST MOV-09 related to goods.

III. Issue a suitable writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the entire proceedings initiated by the respondent authorities in relation to goods under section 129 and 130 against the petitioner as the same has been initiated in contravention of the provisions of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act/Rules and in contravention of the circulars issued by the Central Government which are binding on the respondents.”

The counsel for the petitioner argues that none of the notices as are required to be served under Section 129 of the GST Act have been served upon the petitioner, as such the proceedings initiated and concluded against the petitioner are ex-parte proceedings.

Related Topic:
Allahabad HC in the case of Aparna Purohit Versus The state of U.P.

Observations:

On the basis of the said averments, this Court vide order dated 26.11.2020 had granted the Standing Counsel time to obtain instructions with regard to the averments on account of nonservice of the notices and no opportunity of hearing. The Standing Counsel Sri Jagdish Mishra, on the basis of instructions, states that the order dated 6.1.2020 was got served on the driver of the truck in question, and secondly the order MOV-06 and MOV-07 was also served on the driver of the truck and with regard to the order dated 23.1.2020, MOV-09, the same was neither served on the driver nor on the owner and was served through a fixation on the truck in question.

The Decision of the Court:

Accordingly, the order dated 5.8.2020 and the order dated 23.1.2020 are set aside with liberty to the respondents to conclude proceedings against the petitioner, in accordance with the law.

As the notices have now been served upon the petitioner, the petitioner shall file a fresh reply to the same within a period of three weeks and the respondents shall pass fresh orders, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the objections, in accordance with the law.

The petition is disposed of.

Read & Download the full Decision in pdf:

Allahabad HC in the case of Ranchi Carrying Corporation Versus The State Of U.P.

Profile photo of Consultease Administrator Consultease Administrator

Consultant

Faridabad, India

As a Consultease Administrator I'm responsible for smooth administration of our portal. Reach out to me in case you need help.

Discuss Now
Opinions & information presented by ConsultEase Members are their own.