GST
TRT-2025-
High court of Allahabad
Date:-04-09-25
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order date: 04 Sept 2025
Parties: Opasil Pigments and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. & M/s Shyam Enterprises v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Facts -
- The petitioners’ goods were seized under Section 129 of the UP GST/CGST Act. The appellate authority allowed their appeals on merits by order dated 08.02.2020, quashing the penalty under Section 129(3).
- Subsequently, Department moved an application under Section 161 for rectification, citing pendency of an SLP before the Supreme Court. Based on this, the appeal orders were recalled.
- The petitioners argued that Section 161 permits only rectification of an error apparent on the face of record, not review or recall. Reliance was placed on Deva Metal Powders Pvt. Ltd. V. CTT, U.P. (SC, 2008), which limits rectification to patent errors visible at a glance.
Issue -
- Whether pendency of an SLP before the Supreme Court can justify recall of an appellate order under Section 161 of the GST Act?
Order -
- The single bench of the Hon'ble High court held that Section 161 is confined to rectification of mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used as a tool for review or substitution of a concluded appellate order. The mere filing of an SLP without any interim order or stay does not amount to an error apparent on the face of record.
- The reliance on Section 161 by the authorities to recall a fully reasoned appellate order was therefore held illegal.
- The impugned rectification/recall orders were quashed, and the original appellate orders in favour of the assessees were restored. Both writ petitions were allowed.
Download Case Law
