Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Arpan Agro Industries, Ludhiana, Punjab, represented by its proprietor Arpan Goyal, approached the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court complaining that although it had supplied Fortified Rice Kernels (FRK) to the State of Uttar Pradesh, the GST certificate required for such supply — to be issued by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary, Government of U.P. — had not been issued, despite the requirement flowing from Notification No.39/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 18.10.2017. The respondent was the State of U.P. through the Secretary, Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Lucknow.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to a direction compelling issuance of the GST certificate for its FRK supplies under Notification No.39/2017-Central Tax (Rate).

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Submitted that the required GST certificate for FRK supplied to the State had still not been issued, despite the entitlement flowing from Notification No.39/2017-Central Tax (Rate).
  • Indicated that the grievance would be substantially resolved if a fresh, detailed representation on the point were considered and decided by the competent authority in a time-bound manner, rather than by an adjudication in the writ itself.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Standing Counsel for the State raised no objection to the petitioner's proposal of disposing of the matter through a fresh representation to be decided by the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies, U.P.

Court Order/Findings

  • Permitted the petitioner to file a fresh, detailed representation before the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supplies, U.P., annexing the writ petition, its annexures and supporting documents along with a certified copy of the order.
  • Directed that the representation be considered and decided by a reasoned, speaking order expeditiously, and that if the petitioner is found entitled, the GST certificate be issued within four weeks from the date the representation is placed before the authority.
  • Clarified that the Court had not examined the merits of the petitioner's entitlement, leaving all questions open for the competent authority to decide in accordance with law.

Important Clarification

  • Where a GST-compliance grievance (such as non-issuance of a certificate required under a rate notification) can be resolved administratively, courts will often decline to adjudicate the underlying entitlement and instead direct a time-bound representation, keeping all contentions open.
  • Notification No.39/2017-Central Tax (Rate) requires the relevant certificate for supplies of Fortified Rice Kernels to be issued by an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary of the concerned State Government — a useful reference point for similarly placed FRK suppliers facing delay.

Sections Involved

  • Notification No.39/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 18.10.2017 — prescribes the concessional GST treatment and certification requirement for supply of Fortified Rice Kernels, to be certified by an officer not below Deputy Secretary rank.
  • Article 226, Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction invoked for a mandamus-type direction, exercised here by directing a time-bound administrative representation instead.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions, in part in favour of the Assessee — the Court did not rule on the petitioner's entitlement to the certificate but secured a binding, time-bound commitment that a reasoned decision would follow, with the certificate to issue within four weeks if the petitioner is found eligible.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench
  • Case No.: WRIT-C No.8329 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Hon'ble Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Hon'ble Justice Manish Kumar
  • Decision Date: 03-10-2023
  • Disposal Nature: Disposed of with direction to decide petitioner's representation

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.