M/S Sd Impex v. Saurabh Paul
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- UPGST Act, 2017 s. 74
Judgment
On oral prayer, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead Nicomet Industries Ltd. through the liquidator as party respondent no.4, during the course of the day.
Submission is, the revenue has already approached the liquidator (of the supplier corporation), to liquidate the tax liabilities. To the extent, there is no dispute to the supply made by the supplier against regular tax invoice, the petitioner may not be burdened with the liability upon adjudication made under Section 74 of the UPGST Act, 2017. In that regard, it has been further contended that there can never be concealment or misstatement on part of the petitioner if the original supplier fails to deposit the tax amount.
Matter requires consideration.
Issue notice to the respondent no.4.
All respondents may file counter affidavit within a period of six weeks. Petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.
List thereafter. 2 WTAX No. 1942 of 2026
Until further orders of the Court, operation and effect of the impugned order dated 26.12.2025 shall remain stayed. (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) April 2, 2026 Abhilash
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.