In Absence Of Appellant Or His Lawyer , Appeal Should Be Dismissed In Default Not An Order On Merit : Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that the term “ex-parte” in Rule 63(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2008 can be interpreted as for want of representation of the defendant after service of notice, the case may be decided on merits. However, when the appellant or his counsel is not present, the case may only be dismissed in default. The Court held that in cases where the appellant is not present, the Tribunal must dismiss appeals “for want of prosecution” instead of...

Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Part Of Award Dealing With Non-Arbitrable Dispute

The Allahabad High Court has held that disputes regarding works undertaken by party independent of the contract which contains the arbitration agreement cannot be determined under such arbitration agreement.Section 70 of the Contract Act, 1872 provides that a party is bound to compensate the other party for the work done by the latter party when there was no intention to do the work gratuitously.The bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar held,“wherein some extra...

[Arbitration Act] Retroactive Application Of Judicial Decisions To Arbitral Awards Would Create Legal & Procedural Chaos: Allahabad High Court

Elucidating on the applicability of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh and Ors 2019, the Allahabad High Court has held that “retroactive application of judicial decisions to arbitral awards would create legal and procedural chaos.”For context, in Tarsem Singh (supra), the Apex Court held that the provisions regarding solatium and interest provided in the Land Acquisition Act would apply to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act. The court...

[UP Trade Tax Act] Because Of Refund Due From Assessment Proceedings, Can't Escape Liability Of Depositing Tax Realized: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a registered dealer cannot withhold the tax realised by him from a purchasing dealer only because he had deposited an excess amount of tax at the time of the transaction. The Court held that he cannot escape the liability of depositing the tax realized under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 because a refund is due to him from assessment proceedings.“The registered dealer after realizing the tax cannot withhold the same on the pretext that some excess amount of...

No Provisions Of Appeal Provided Against An Order Passed By State GST Officer Under IGST Act: Allahabad High Court Admits Writ Petition

The Allahabad High Court has admitted the writ petition stating that the IGST Act lacks provision for appeals provided against an order passed by the state GST Officer.The bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Anish Kumar Gupta while admitting the writ petition noted that order passed under the IGST Act, the appeal shall lie before the Central Tax Officer. However, Section 6(3) of the UPGST Act, 2017, specifically excludes the jurisdiction of the Central Tax Officers to...

Take Steps To Avoid Delays In Filing Arbitration Appeals: Allahabad High Court To State's Principal Law Secretary

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Principal Secretary (Law), Uttar Pradesh to take steps to avoid delays in filing arbitration appeals beyond statutory limitations by the State Government and submit a report on the actions taken in this regard within 6 months.While deciding an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh with a delay of 224 days, beyond the statutory period of 120 days, Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that...

Allahabad High Court Monthly Tax Digest: May 2024

NOMINAL INDEX Mr. Pranay Dhabhai v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 299 Mentha And Allied Products Ltd vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 300 Satish Kumar Bansal Huf v. National Faceless Assessment Centre Nafac And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 301 M/S K Y Tobacco Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 319 M/S Rajshi Processors Raebareli Thru. Its Partner Ashok Kumar Lakhotia v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State...

[Commercial Courts Act] Disputes Related To Immovable Property Used Exclusively For Trade Are 'Commercial Disputes: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court, while considering the case of a hotel, has held that a dispute related to an immovable property that is used exclusively for the purpose of trade or commerce would fall under the ambit of a 'Commercial Dispute' under Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.“Agreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce fall under the purview of “commercial disputes” as definer by Section 2(c)(vii) of the CC Act. This categorization...

[Central Excise Act] Fixing Consecutive Dates of Hearing on Very Short Notice Violative of Opportunity of Hearing U/S 33A: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that fixing consecutive dates of hearing within the period of a week would be violative of the opportunity of hearing as envisaged under Section 33A of the Central Excise Act, 1994.Section 33A of the Central Excise Act provides that opportunity of hearing be given to a party in a proceeding under the Act, if desired by them. Further, it lays down the procedure for granting adjournment in adjudication proceedings to either of the parties on the condition that a...

Allahabad High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against Facilitation Council Award For Lack Of Mandatory Pre-Deposit U/S 19 MSME Act

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the award passed by the Zonal Micro and Small Enterprises, Facilitation Council (MSEFC), Meerut Zone, Meerut under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 as the petitioners, Tamil Nadu Generation And Distribution Corporation Limited and others, had refused to make the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 19 of the MSME Act.The Court held that even though principles of natural justice have been...

[Arbitration Act] Arbitrator Obligated U/S 31(5) To Deliver Signed Copies Of Award To Parties, Irrespective Of No Specific Requests: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that the arbitrator is obligated to deliver signed copies of arbitral award to each party to the arbitration. It has been held that irrespective of the fact that no specific request has been made by the parties for certified copy of the award, the arbitrator must deliver the award in terms of Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.“Section 31(5) of the Act unequivocally imposes an obligation upon the Arbitrator to deliver a signed copy of...

Arbitral Award Can't Be Set Aside Merely Due To Incorrect Application Of Law Or Misinterpretation Of Evidence: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that an arbitral award should only be set aside if it is clearly vitiated by "patent illegality" evident on the face of the record. The bench held that an award cannot be annulled merely due to an incorrect application of the law or misinterpretation of evidence.Brief Facts:The matter pertained to the acquisition of land for the purpose of widening National Highway No. 26 for commercial use. Initially, the Competent...