The Allahabad High Court observed that a growing number of GST disputes are reaching the Court on the common grievance that adjudication orders are being passed on dates that were never fixed during the proceedings and without any prior notice or intimation to taxpayers.
The bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi noted that the issue has become widespread and raises important questions concerning procedural fairness and the functioning of the GST adjudication framework.
The High Court recorded that several similar cases are being filed where final GST adjudication orders are issued well after the last date fixed for hearing. Referring to an earlier decision in M/s Sun Glass Works Private Ltd. v. State of U.P., the Court noted that a Single Judge had held that adjudicating authorities do not possess any statutory power to reserve orders on the date fixed for hearing and subsequently upload them on the GST portal on a later date.
Buy Now: 130 GST Judgments – E-Magazine July 2026
The Bench further noted that although the earlier ruling is currently under challenge before the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition, no interim protection has been granted against the operation of that judgment.
The Court also recognised the practical difficulties faced by GST adjudicating officers. The Bench observed that taxpayers are genuinely aggrieved because orders are being passed on subsequent dates without any apparent statutory authority. At the same time, government authorities contend that it is often not feasible for adjudicating officers to prepare detailed orders and upload them on the very date of hearing.
The Court pointed out that the delay between the hearing date and the date on which the order is eventually passed varies significantly from case to case. In some matters, the gap extends to several months, creating further complications regarding the legality of belated adjudication orders.
The Bench also noted that in cases involving excessive delays, State counsel have often agreed that such orders may be set aside and the proceedings restored to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication. However, where delays are comparatively short, the State frequently argues that no prejudice has been caused to the taxpayer. In the present matter, the delay was approximately one week.
The High Court further observed that delayed orders are only one category of procedural deficiencies affecting GST adjudication. Other instances include notices that fail to specify the date and place of hearing, inadequate time being granted to taxpayers, and situations where the date for filing a reply coincides with the hearing date itself. According to the Court, such variations are creating challenges in maintaining consistency in judicial decisions.
The Court examined the statutory framework under the U.P. GST Act and the CGST Act. It noted that while Section 168 empowers authorities to issue orders, instructions, and directions for implementing the Act, the broader “removal of difficulties” provision under Section 172 may provide a mechanism for addressing the systemic issue.
The Bench prima facie observed that the Government, acting on the recommendations of the GST Council, may issue appropriate orders to remove practical difficulties encountered in implementing the GST law, provided such directions are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act or the Rules.
The Bench indicated that the GST system and the Common Portal may not currently be equipped to permit adjudication orders passed on one date to be uploaded on a later date. According to the Court, this appears to be the root cause behind the recurring litigation being witnessed across the State.
The Court suggested that the issue could potentially be resolved by enabling the Common Portal to permit the uploading of orders within a reasonable period after they are passed, thereby aligning administrative realities with procedural requirements.
Considering the broader implications of the issue, the Allahabad High Court directed that the Union of India and GSTN be impleaded as respondents in the proceedings. Notices were ordered to be served upon the concerned authorities to obtain instructions regarding the systemic concerns raised by the Court.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on August 17, 2026.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
