ANANT RAM vs M/S SHYAM LAL SHRI NARAIN

Dated: 06.11.2026
GSTAT
State Bench Lucknow
Court No. Court I
APL/101/LCK/2026
ANANT RAM
.............Appellant
Versus
M/S SHYAM LAL SHRI NARAIN, PROPRIETOR, HNO. 202 A KAJI KHEDA
KANPUR UPKNN 208007 .............Respondent
Quorum
Hon’ble Santosh Kumar Srivastava, Member(Judicial)
Hon’ble Arvind Kumar, Member (Technical)
Counsel for Appellant
MR. MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH, ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER, SGST
MR. ASHUTOSH MISHRA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
SGST
Counsel for Respondent
MR. DHARMENDRA SRIVASTAVA,
CA
Form GST APL-04A
[See rules 113(1) & 115]
Summary of the order and demand after issue of order by the GST Appellate Tribunal
No
whether remand order :
Order reference no. : ZA090371126000134H Date of order : 06/11/2026
1. GSTIN/Temporary ID/UIN - 09ACDPG9868R1ZJ
Appeal Case Reference no. -
2. Date - 22/04/2026
APL/101/LCK/2026
3. Name of the appellant - ANANT RAM , [email protected] , 7235002153
Name of the respondant -
4.
1. M/S SHYAM LAL SHRI NARAIN , [email protected] , 9415132520
5. Order appealed against - AD0911240634082
Demand Order
(5.1) Order Type -

(5.2) Ref Number - ZD091224306482L Date - 18/12/2024
Personal Hearing - 06/11/2026 06/10/2026 25/09/2026 15/09/2026 09/09/2026
6.
7. Status of Order under Appeal - Reject - Order under Appeal is annulled
Order in brief - The Revenue Department filed an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated
18.12.2024 passed in favour of M/s Shyam Lal Shri Narain for FY 2019–20, challenging the deletion
of ITC demands under Section 17(2) read with Rules 42 and 43 and the relief granted on GSTR-3B vs.
GSTR-2A mismatch. The Tribunal observed that: 1. Rule 42 ITC Reversal: The First Appellate
Authority deleted the demand of Rs,47,43,843.14 without properly recording the turnover figures,
common ITC details, or verifying the separate accounts maintained for taxable goods and exempt
Papad supplies. Therefore, the order was held to be non-speaking on this issue and the matter was
remanded for fresh adjudication. 2. GSTR-2A Mismatch: ITC of Rs.74,325 was allowed on the basis
of supplier clarification, tax invoices and banking records, in accordance with CBIC Circular No.
183/15/2022-GST. This relief was upheld. 3. Savorit Limited ITC: ITC of Rs. 59,867.50 was already
disallowed by the First Appellate Authority due to lack of proper reconciliation. Hence, the
Department's objection was rejected. Final Decision: The Tribunal partly allowed the
Revenue's appeal by modifying the Order-in-Appeal dated 18.12.2024. The sustained
demand of Rs. 1,78,515 was upheld, while the deletion of the Rule 42 ITC reversal demand was set
aside and remanded to the First Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication.
8.
Summary of Order
9. If demand order then whether demand quantified: No
10. For Other orders and Demand orders which are not quantified:
Issues
as
raised
by
proper
officer
Issues as determined by Appellate/Revisional
Order by GST Appellate Tribunal
authority
On December 18, 2024, the Appellate Officer passed
an appellate order partially allowing the appeal filed
by the dealer; consequently, a consolidated liability
of �178,515.00 was determined covering tax,
interest, and penalty, resulting in a reduction of
�9,566,244.00 from the total demand of
�9,744,759.00 originally raised by the Proper
Officer.
The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's
appeal by modifying the Order-in-Appeal
dated 18.12.2024. The sustained demand
of Rs. 1,78,515 was upheld, while the
deletion of the Rule 42 ITC reversal
demand was set aside and remanded to the
First Appellate Authority for fresh
adjudication.
Short
or non-
payment
of tax
Place :LUCKNOW
Signature
Date : 06.11.2026
LUCKNOW ANAMIKA DEVI
Designation : Stenographer/Law researcher
Jurisdiction :Lucknow