Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTCGST Assistant Commissioner Cited Judgements With Judge’s Names In Affidavit: Allahabad HC...

CGST Assistant Commissioner Cited Judgements With Judge’s Names In Affidavit: Allahabad HC Reprimands Officer

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Allahabad High Court has reprimanded the CGST Assistant Commissioner for citing judgements with judge’s names in affidavit.

The bench of Justice Samit Gopal has directed that names of the Judges are not mentioned while referring the judgments and it is only the names of the parties, date of decision, the details of the case/citation and the relevant text are relevant which needs to be quoted and not the names of the Judges.

The bench referred to the counter affidavit in which the deponent officer while relying on numerous judgments of the Supreme Court and High Court has referred to a judgment in the case of Ram Narain Popli Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation on 14.01.2023 and after the same he has mentioned the names of Hon’ble Judges of the Apex Court who have decided the said case.The deponent mentioned the names of the Judges of the Apex Court Presiding over the Bench in the matter. This system of mentioning the names of Judges while giving reference to the judgments is totally uncalled for.

The court directed the the Registrar (Compliance) to communicate this order to the District and Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar and the court concerned for information, compliance and necessary action and also to the Director General Central Goods and Service Tax, Commissionerate, Gurugram for further transmission to the officer for being cautious in future.

CASE DETAILS

Case Title: Alice Lee @ Li Tengli Versus UOI

Case No.: Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. – 41710 Of 2025

Date: 09/02/2026

Counsel For  Petitioner:  Jitendra Kumar Srivastava

Counsel For Respondent: A.S.G.I., Dhananjay Awasthi

Click Here To Read Order

Read More: DGFT Operationalises Inter-Ministerial Group for Supply Chain Resilience Amid West Asia Conflict

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

No Mini-Trial at Cognizance Stage: Directors’ Claim of Cooperation Must Be Examined During Trial

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against two individuals facing...

Missing Seized Records Must Be Considered While Testing ITC Claim; Duplicate GST Demands Ordered Corrected: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that the tax department’s inability to furnish seized...

Capital Addition Can’t Be Taxed on Assumptions in Reassessment: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has upheld the deletion of a ₹2.73 crore addition made...

GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Without Addressing Taxpayer’s Grounds: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has set aside an appellate order concerning cancellation of GST...

More like this

No Mini-Trial at Cognizance Stage: Directors’ Claim of Cooperation Must Be Examined During Trial

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against two individuals facing...

Missing Seized Records Must Be Considered While Testing ITC Claim; Duplicate GST Demands Ordered Corrected: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that the tax department’s inability to furnish seized...

Capital Addition Can’t Be Taxed on Assumptions in Reassessment: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has upheld the deletion of a ₹2.73 crore addition made...