9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (3) TMI 1029 - HC - GSTSeeking to quash SCN issued without jurisdiction - SCN did not contain proper reasons - violation of the doctrine of double jeopardy barred by res judicata - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Upon a perusal of the show cause notice it is clear that ingredients of Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) have not been adhered to as there is no allegation of fraud or any willful-mis-statement and/or suppression of material facts in the said show cause notice. Subsequent to issuance of said show cause notice this writ petition has been filed. However in the meantime order under Section 74 of the Act has also been passed by the authorities. The order is also bereft of any reasons for issuing the notice Section 74 of the Act and does not comply the ingredients thereof. Conclusion - The SCN did not adhere to the requirements of Section 74 of the UPGST Act as it lacked allegations of fraud or willful misstatement. Consequently the impugned SCN and the subsequent order were quashed and set aside. Petition disposed off.
The Allahabad High Court, comprising Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf and Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra JJ., addressed a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner sought to quash a show cause notice (SCN) dated June 3, 2024, issued under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (UPGST Act), as well as an ex parte order dated February 3, 2025, both concerning the fiscal year 2017-18. The petitioner argued that the SCN was "bad in law," violated the "doctrine of double jeopardy," was "barred by res judicata," and was issued "without jurisdiction," contrary to a moratorium declared by an NCLT Order dated April 15, 2024.The Court found that the SCN did not adhere to the requirements of Section 74 of the UPGST Act, as it lacked allegations of fraud or willful misstatement. Consequently, the impugned SCN and the subsequent order were quashed and set aside. The Court granted the authority liberty to proceed in accordance with the law, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
|
