BharatTaxGST

Balaram Panigrahi vs. The Commnr., CT And GST, Odisha

Original PDF →
WP(C)/29806/2023HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01072154202327 September 2023Bench: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY2 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29806 of 2023 Balaram Panigrahi …. Petitioner Mr.Kananbala Roy Choudhury,Adv -versus- The Commissioner of CT & GST & others …. Opposite parties. Mr.Digant Das, Additional Standing counsel CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI MR JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER 27.09.2023 Order No.

01.

W.P.(C) No. 29806 of 2023 & I.A.No.14351 of 2023

1.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2.

Heard Ms.K.R.Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr.D.Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 14.03.2023 under Annexure-4, by which opposite party No.2 has rejected the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of “Delay in submission of Appeal.”

4.

Ms. K.R. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that there is absolutely no delay in submission of appeal, but opposite party No.2 without application of his mind, has rejected the said appeal in a 2

mechanical manner, vide order dated 14.03.2023 which cannot be sustained in the eye of law.

5.

Mr.D.Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department contended that in view of the order passed by the Apex Court, since the period of limitation covers the same, error is apparent on the fact of the record so far as rejection of appeal is concerned.

6.

Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is well within the period of limitation. Therefore, this Court set aside the order dated 14.03.2023 under Annexure-4 issued by opposite party No.2 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of “Delay in submission of Appeal”. Accordingly, this Court directs the said authority to rehear the matter in accordance with law by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

7.

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Dr.S.K.Panigrahi) Judge

(G.Satapathy) Judge Lingaraj

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.