2025 (6) TMI 101 - HC - GST

Challenge to impugned order with summary order passed by the respondent no.3 as well as the impugned order passed by the respondent no.2 under section 130 of the GST Act - HELD THAT - Looking to the fact that controversy raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court in S/s Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar 2024 (8) TMI 71 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT the present case is being decided without exchanging the pleadings. In S/s Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar this Court has held that if excess stock is found the proceedings under section 73 and 74 of UPGST Act will come into play and the proceedings under Section 130 of the GST Act cannot be initiated. The impugned order dated 27.7.2022 3.1.2023 and 27.11.2024 passed in the proceedings under section 130 of the GST Act are hereby quashed - Petition allowed.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court, through Hon'ble Justice Piyush Agrawal, adjudicated a writ petition challenging orders dated 27.7.2022, 3.1.2023, and 27.11.2024 issued under section 130 of the GST Act. The petitioner relied on the precedent set in S/s Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar Vs. Additional Commissioner [Writ Tax No. 1082 of 2022, decided 25.07.2024], affirmed by the Supreme Court (SLP Civil Diary No. 5879 of 2025, order dated 17.4.2025), which held that "if excess stock is found, the proceedings under section 73 and 74 of UPGST Act will come into play and the proceedings under Section 130 of the GST Act cannot be initiated." The State did not file a counter affidavit despite being granted time. Applying this binding precedent, the Court quashed the impugned orders passed under section 130 of the GST Act and allowed the writ petition, directing that any amounts deposited by the petitioner be refunded in accordance with law.