The Allahabad High Court set aside an order confirming ₹5,47,000 in tax against a proposed ₹4,29,065, holding that the bar on exceeding the notice is mandatory and remitting the matter.
The Allahabad High Court has held that an adjudication order confirming a demand higher than the amount proposed in the show cause notice (SCN) is without jurisdiction, as Section 75(7) of the UPGST Act, 2017 and the CGST Act, 2017 is mandatory. [Ashish Kumar Srivastava v. State of U.P. & Ors., 2026-juristway.com-3141-HC(Allahabad)-GST]
A Division Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi set aside the adjudication order dated 29 Apr 2024, passed under Section 73 for 2018-19.
The SCN dated 11 Jan 2024 proposed tax of ₹4,29,065, no interest and a penalty of ₹42,907. The adjudication order confirmed tax of ₹5,47,000, no interest and a penalty of ₹54,700, exceeding the proposal on both tax and penalty.
The Bench held that the order was passed in gross violation of Section 75(7). Once the legislature has forbidden confirmation beyond the proposed demand, it observed, it “may never became open to the adjudicating authority to confirm the demand in excess of that proposed.”
Treating this as a fundamental illegality apparent on the face of the record, the Bench found no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit. It decided the petition after hearing counsel for the petitioner and for the UPGST authorities.
The matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, preferably within three months. The Bench recorded the petitioner’s undertaking not to seek undue or long adjournments, and disposed of the petition.
2026-juristway.com-3141-HC(Allahabad)-GST
