H.N.K. Decoration vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax And Ors.

Held

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's submission that the Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and is functional. Consequently, the Court found merit in the petitioner's request to transfer the matter to the appropriate forum for appeal. The Court directed that the writ petition be disposed of with the observation that the petitioner can prefer an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata. The Court also granted the petitioner four weeks' time to file the appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. Crucially, the Court implicitly agreed with the petitioner's request regarding the exclusion of the period during which the writ petition was pending for computing the limitation period, as it disposed of the petition with the liberty to file an appeal within the specified time frame, without imposing any limitation bar based on the pendency of the writ petition. The specific reasoning for excluding the period was not elaborated but was granted as part of the disposal order.

Facts

The petitioner, H. N. K. Decoration, filed a writ petition before the High Court. The petitioner's primary submission was that since the Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT Kolkata) has been constituted and is functional, the instant writ petition should be transferred to the Tribunal. The petitioner sought four weeks' time to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. They also requested that the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court be excluded for the purpose of computing the limitation period for filing the appeal. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be transferred to the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) given its functional status, and if so, under which provision of law? 2. Whether the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court should be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing an appeal before the GSTAT? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that with the constitution and functionality of the Appellate Tribunal, the writ petition should be transferred to it. They relied on the principle that statutory remedies should be exhausted and that the Tribunal is the appropriate forum for such appeals. They specifically sought to file an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017 and requested exclusion of the pending period for limitation. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or the State. Their appearance was noted, and learned advocates were engaged.