^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

VIKAS AND ASSOCIATES vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
(Allahabad High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SHEKHAR B. SARAF
MANJIVE SHUKLA

Pet. Counsel

Suyash Agarwal

Res. Counsel

Anjali Upadhya

Petitioner / Applicant	VIKAS AND ASSOCIATES
Respondent	STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
Court	Allahabad High Court
State	Uttar Pradesh
Date	Aug 28, 2024
Order No.	Writ Tax No. - 1253 of 2024
Citation	2024(8) TAXREPLY 10670
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER 1. Heard Mr. Suyash Agarwal, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Aditya Bushan Singhal, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated July 12, 2024 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, being the respondent No.2 herein. 3. Vide impugned order, the respondent No.2 has directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 5.61 crores as amount payable in lieu of GST for allotment of a plot for long term lease. It is to be noted that the petitioner has deposited the aforesaid amount under protest. 4. Counsel on behalf of petitioner submits that there is no GST payable on such allotment, and therefore, the amount, which is being demanded, is without any basis in law, arbitrary and absolutely malafide. He further submits that this demand can o....