^®
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. |

YFC PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS
(Allahabad High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

PIYUSH AGRAWAL

Pet. Counsel

Nikhil Pandey

Nishant Mishra

Res. Counsel

C.s.c.

Petitioner / Applicant	YFC PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	STATE OF UP AND OTHERS
Court	Allahabad High Court
State	Uttar Pradesh
Date	Oct 21, 2024
Order No.	WRIT TAX No. - 1541 of 2024
Citation	2024(10) TAXREPLY 11302
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
1. Heard Mr. Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ravi Shanker Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. By means of present petition, the petitioner is, inter alia, praying for the following relief:- “i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 31.3.2023 (Annexure No. 1) passed by respondent no. 2; 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the order passed by the proper officer, an appeal was preferred on electronic mode but the same has been rejected by the impugned order without assigning any reason. He submits that the petitioner has only communicated the order through a notice that his appeal has been rejected. He further submits that neither any order has been passed nor any reason has been assigned for rejecting the appeal. 4. Per contra, Mr. Ravi Shanker Pandey, learned ACSC has supported the impugned orders and submits that....