Allahabad HC to decide writ petition on record, petitioner claimed ITC on supplies from non-compliant dealers

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 30 October 2026

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In M/S Garg Duplex & Paper Mills Private ... vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others, the Allahabad High Court decided a writ petition on the basis of available documents, with consent of parties. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC) on inward supplies from two suppliers whose GSTR-2A showed nil returns and non-deposit of tax.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

The court decided to adjudicate the writ petition based on the documents available on record, with the consent of both parties, without requiring further affidavits.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should be prepared for courts to decide writ petitions at the fresh stage based solely on existing records if both parties consent. Litigants must ensure meticulous record-keeping, including tax invoices, e-way bills, and payment proofs, to substantiate ITC claims, especially when suppliers' compliance is questioned.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Writ petitions can be decided at an early stage by consent, based on existing records.
2Maintaining comprehensive books of accounts and statutory compliance is crucial for ITC claims.
3Discrepancies in supplier's GSTR-2A can lead to audit scrutiny of ITC claims.

The Legal Issue The petitioner, M/s Garg Duplex & Paper Mills Private, a dealer registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, claimed Input Tax Credit (ITC) on inward supplies of waste paper from two registered dealers, M/s Rahul Paper Traders and M/s JMD Traders, during the Financial Year 2017-18. The petitioner asserted that it maintained all requisite books of accounts, including tax invoices, e-way bills, bilties, kanta parchi, purchase ledger, and banking channel payments, and that these transactions were reflected in its GSTR-2A. An audit report, however, indicated that the two suppliers had nil GSTR-2A and had not deposited the tax, forming the basis for the dispute.

Court's Reasoning The Allahabad High Court, with the joint statement and consent of both the petitioner's counsel, Sri Shubham Agrawal along with Ms. Chhaya Gautam, and the respondent's counsel, Sri Ravi Shankar Pandey, decided to adjudicate the writ petition at the fresh stage. Both parties agreed that they did not propose to file any further affidavits and that the petition could be decided based on the documents already available on record.

What Follows The writ petition is being decided by the Allahabad High Court based on the documents presented by the parties, without the need for additional affidavits. The court will proceed to examine the petitioner's claim for Input Tax Credit in light of the audit findings regarding the suppliers' GSTR-2A and tax deposit status under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.