Allahabad High Court
CESTAT Cannot Reject Taxpayer Appeals Below ₹2 Lakh On Monetary Limit Alone: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court recently held that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal cannot mechanically reject a taxpayer's appeal on the ground that the amount involved is below ₹2 lakh. The Court said such appeals are maintainable as a rule and may be refused only in exceptional cases.The ruling was delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla. Explaining the law, the bench said, "Thus, while appeals filed by the revenue, below the...
Money Decrees Ordinarily Not Stayed: Allahabad High Court Upholds Release of 75% MSME Arbitral Award Deposit
The Allahabad High Court's Lucknow Bench has upheld an order of the Commercial Court permitting release of 75% of the amount deposited under Section 19 of the MSME Act in favour of Genebio Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Justice Jaspreet Singh noted that the amount was released to avoid grave hardship to the MSME while the challenge to the arbitral award remains pending. The court also upheld the direction requiring the challenger to furnish security for the remaining 25% of the award amount. It...
Arbitration Award Challenge Not Inadmissible Solely For Lack Of Condonation Of Delay Plea: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has recently reiterated that a challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not become not maintainable merely because it is not accompanied by a separate application seeking condonation of delay. The court said what matters is whether the party has, in the petition itself, set out reasons for the delay or sought the benefit of limitation law, and whether the court has applied its mind to those pleadings. Justice...
Allahabad High Court Dismisses PIL Against Retrospective Property Tax By Kanpur Municipal Corp.
On 12 January, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the retrospective enhancement of property tax by the Kanpur Municipal Corporation, holding that a PIL is not maintainable where the relief sought essentially pertains to the private grievances of an association's members. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held: “Filing of petitions in the nature of PIL, though essentially projecting the interest...
RERA Tribunal Order Unsustainable Where Heard by One Bench And Pronounced By Another: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has set aside a judgment of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, holding that a case heard by one bench cannot be decided by another bench if one of its members did not hear the arguments. The court said such a judgment is unsustainable in law and goes against fundamental principles of judicial procedure. A Single Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said that the bench that hears a matter must also decide it. It added that views of members who heard the case...
Interest For Delayed Possession Under RERA Can't Be Waived Through Private Settlement: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has recently held that a private settlement between a promoter and a homebuyer cannot override mandatory statutory obligations under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Dismissing an appeal filed by the Lucknow Development Authority, a single bench of Justice Prashant Kumar upheld an order directing payment of statutory interest to a buyer for delay in handing over possession of a flat.The court said the law leaves no scope for promoters to avoid...
Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge To DRT Registrar's Power To Issue Notices In SARFAESI Proceedings
The Allahabad High Court has rejected a challenge to a notice issued by the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Tribunal in a securitisation case, holding that the Registrar was empowered under the DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993. “When power to issue notice to a defendant has specifically been conferred upon the Registrar of DRT, it cannot be said that the Registrar has no power to issue notice to a defendant to show-cause as to why the S.A. should not be allowed, and also to caution the defendant...
Physical Service Of Notices Necessary After Cancellation Of GST Registration: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court on 19 January held that any adjudication notice issued after the cancellation of a GST registration must be served physically to the assessee to comply with the principles of natural justice. A Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla was hearing a challenge against a notice issued to the petitioner three years after its GST registration was cancelled. The petitioner argued that it could not access the portal to which the notice had been...
Wrong PIN Code In E-Way Bill Alone Cannot Trigger Seizure Or Penalty Under GST Act: Allahabad High Court Reaffirms
The Allahabad High Court has once again made it clear that GST authorities cannot detain goods or impose penalties merely because of a wrong PIN Code in an e-way bill, if the addresses of the consignor and consignee are otherwise correct. A single-judge bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal held that proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act are are not justified for clerical mistakes. Relying on a binding circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and his own earlier...
GST Authorities Cannot Pass Orders Against Deceased Taxpayer, Recover From Heirs: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that while GST law allows proceedings to be pursued against a legal heir after the death of a taxpayer, authorities cannot determine tax liability in the name of a deceased person and then recover it from the heir. The court ruled that Section 93 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, permits recovery from legal representatives only after a valid determination against them, and not through orders passed against a dead assessee. A bench of Justice Shekhar B...
Allahabad High Court Has No Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, Cannot Extend Arbitrator's Mandate U/S 29A A&C Act
The Allahabad High Court has held that it lacks jurisdiction to extend the mandate of an arbitrator under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on the ground that it does not exercise ordinary original civil jurisdiction and therefore does not fall within the definition of “Court” under Section 2(1)(e)(i) of the Act. Consequently, the High Court ruled that it cannot entertain writ petitions seeking time-bound or expeditious disposal of arbitral proceedings when a specific...