GST | Assessee Entitled To Fresh Notice If Initial Notice U/S 73 Was Missed Due To Being Uploaded Under 'Additional Notices' Tab: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that an assessee is entitled to fresh notices demanding unpaid tax or short tax under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, if the initial notices were not duly communicated to the assessee. A division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar relied on Ola Fleet Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of UP (2024) whereby “benefit of doubt” was given to the assessee since notices issued to it did not show up on the assessee's...

Proceedings U/S 130 Of UPGST Act Not Applicable If Excess Stock Is Found At Time Of Survey: Allahabad High Court

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has held that proceedings under Section 130 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 cannot be initiated where stock is found excess at the time of survey. Section 130 of the UPGST Act provides for confiscation of goods and penalty in cases where supply, transport of goods has been made in contravention to the provisions of the Act with the intention to evade tax. It also includes penalty when an assesee does not account for the goods on...

Arbitration Act | New Evidence Cannot Be Adduced At S.37 Stage, Bar Of Limitation U/S 34(3) Is Attracted: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court Bench of Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Prashant Kumar, held that the amendment obtained or raising fresh grounds virtually amounts to file a fresh appeal and would be barred by limitation as laid down under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act. Hence, it is not open for the appellant to raise any new ground or adduce any fresh evidence in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act.Brief FactsThe instant appeal under Section 37 of 1996 Act1 has been filed...

While Filing Application U/S 8 Of Arbitration Act, Applicant Is Not Required To Dispute Contents Of Plaint: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court Bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar has held that there is no requirement for the applicant to dispute the contents of the plaint, while filling in an application under Section 8. The very fact that an application has been filed necessarily means that the applicant wants to refer the dispute to arbitration.Additionally, the court held that the scope of judicial review and jurisdiction of the Court under Section 8 and 11 of the Act is identical,...

Benefit Of SC Judgment On Extension Of Limitation During COVID-19 Can't Be Granted On Mere Asking, Especially When Party Is In Default: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that the benefit of extension of limitation during COVID-19, as per In Re Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, cannot be granted to a party merely for the asking, especially when there is default on the part of the party seeking such extension. While dismissing Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.'s appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar held,“The benefit of the...

Allahabad High Court Grants Interim Relief On Plea Challenging Order U/S 129 UPGST Act Claiming Asst Commissioner Was Not 'Proper Officer'

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has granted interim relief in a writ petition challenging the order under Section 129 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.Petitioner was transporting Arecanuts, when the shipment was intercepted by the Mobile Squad. Due to alleged reuse of bill and e-way bills, physical verification of the goods was ordered. Though no discrepancies were found upon physical verification, an order of detention of goods was passed. Subsequently, the Assistant...

Article 227 Is A Constitutional Provision Which Remains Untouched By Non-Obstante Clause Of S. 5 Of Arbitration Act: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal held that Article 227 is a constitutional provision which remains untouched by the non-obstante clause of Section 5 of the Act. In these circumstances, what is important to note is that though petitions can be filed under Article 227 against judgments allowing or dismissing first appeals under Section 37 of the Act, yet the High Court would be extremely circumspect in interfering with the same, taking into account the statutory...

Arbitral Award Based On Law Prevailing At Time Of Proceedings Cannot Be Held To Be Illegal Due To Subsequent Apex Court Ruling: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal, held that if parties were allowed to reopen concluded arbitrations based on new judicial rulings, it would lead to a flood of claims seeking to modify or overturn arbitral awards. Moreover, the retroactive application of judicial decisions to arbitral awards would create legal and procedural chaos. Arbitrators make decisions based on the legal framework and precedents available at the time of the arbitration. Expecting them to foresee and...

Petition Under Article 227 Not Maintainable Against Orders Of Tribunal When Remedies U/S 34 & 37 Of Arbitration Act Are Available: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench of Justice Subahsh Vidyarthi observed that petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal directing the petitioners to provide a copy of the contract between the parties and the final bill to the claimant, cannot be entertained. In the present case, a petition under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution was filed against orders passed by an Arbitral Tribunal. Brief Facts ...

[S.74 GST Act] Adjudicating Authority Must Record Prima Facie Satisfaction Regarding Assessee Wrongfully Obtaining Input Tax Credit: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that for initiating proceedings under Section 74 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, it is necessary for the adjudicating authority to record prima facie satisfaction regarding the assessee having wrongfully availed input tax credit (ITC) by fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts. The Court held that once the proceedings under Section 73 have been closed regarding wrongful availment of ITC, proceedings for the same cannot be initiated...

Application U/S. 34 Of The Arbitration & Conciliation Act Not To Be Dismissed For Non-filing Of Certified Copy Of Arbitral Award If Explanation Provided: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar has observed that if a certified/signed copy of the award cannot be obtained and filed with an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966, filing a copy of the award along with an explanation would be an appropriate exercise.Background FactsThe appellant filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, aggrieved by an arbitral award...

Receipt Of Arbitral Award By Party A Sine Qua Non For Limitation U/S 34(3) To Begin, General Clauses Act Does Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that receipt of the award by the party is a sine qua non for limitation under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to begin and definition of “service by post” under Section 27 of the General Clauses does not apply.The Court observed that Section 27 of the General Clauses Act which defined service by post in a Central Legislation if the words 'serve' or either of the expressions 'give' or 'send' or any other expression is used to mean that...