The Allahabad High Court has severely reprimanded a State GST officer for filing a misleading personal affidavit to cover up a “copy-paste” appellate order. Justice Piyush Agrawal, expressing strong displeasure at the officer’s conduct, initially directed the matter to be placed before the criminal contempt bench but deferred the action to grant one final opportunity to the State.
Case Background
The case involves a writ petition filed by Adboulevard Media Private Limited challenging an appellate order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal) First, State Tax, Meerut.
The petitioner approached the High Court alleging that the appellate authority rejected their GST refund application without assigning proper reasons. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was a result of a “copy-paste” method, as it contained paragraphs relating to a completely different party. Furthermore, the order cited facts regarding a tax period (October 2024 to January 2025) that was not even in dispute, while the actual refund claim pertained to the period from April 2024 to June 2024.
The Controversy Regarding Affidavits
Taking serious note of these allegations, the High Court had earlier directed the officer concerned to file a personal affidavit explaining his conduct.
In a personal affidavit filed on December 10, 2025, the officer stated that “no copy-paste method has been used.” However, the Court, upon perusing the order, found that it quoted matter unrelated to the disputed period, prima facie indicating a lack of application of mind.
Subsequently, on December 16, 2025, the officer filed another affidavit attempting to justify the order. In paragraph 9 of this affidavit, the officer categorically stated that the appellate order was passed after “due consideration” of the Government of India Circular No. 230/24/2024-GST dated September 10, 2024.
Court’s Observation and Analysis
During the hearing on December 18, 2025, Justice Piyush Agrawal scrutinized the officer’s claim against the actual text of the impugned order.
The Court observed that apart from quoting the report signed by the Proper Officer, the appellate order contained “no word about the circular.” When the Court questioned the Additional Advocate General (AAG) on whether the phrase “on consideration” or any reference to the circular could be found in the order, the AAG admitted that the officer merely quoted the report of the Proper Officer.
Justice Agrawal made a stinging observation regarding the functioning of the department:
“This shows the functioning of the GST Department. The officers has courage not only to pass the perverse order but filed his personal affidavit trying to mislead the Court stating that after due consideration the order has been passed.”
The Court noted that despite being granted time on two occasions to file a better affidavit, the officer persisted in trying to mislead the Court.
The Decision
Initially, the Court ordered: “In view of the above, let the matter be placed before the appropriate Bench dealing with criminal contempt on 20.1.2026 for issuing notice to the respondent no. 1.”
However, following the dictation of the order, the Additional Advocate General, Sri Anoop Trivedi, requested a last opportunity of two weeks to file a better affidavit on behalf of the respondent.
Acceding to the request, the Court listed the matter for further hearing on January 6, 2026, effectively giving the officer a final chance to explain his conduct before potential contempt proceedings are initiated.
Case Details:
Case Title: Adboulevard Media Private Limited Vs. Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal) First, State Tax, Meerut And Another
Case No.: Writ Tax No. 6707 of 2025
Bench: Justice Piyush Agrawal
Counsel for Petitioner: Raj Kumar Singh, Rajat Aren
Counsel for Respondent: C.S.C., Anoop Trivedi (Addl. Advocate General), Ravi Shankar Pandey (ACSC)
