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

Held

The Court observed that the Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and is functional. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that it is being transferred to the Appellate Tribunal. The petitioner was granted four weeks' time to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. The Court also implicitly accepted the petitioner's request by stating that the writ petition is disposed of 'with the above observation', which included the request for time to file an appeal and the implied need for limitation considerations. The specific direction regarding the exclusion of the period of pendency for limitation was not explicitly stated as a finding but was part of the petitioner's request that led to the disposal.

Facts

The petitioner, H. N. K. Decoration, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging an order or action by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Bureau of Investigation. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner appeared before the Court and submitted that since the Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and is functional, the writ petition should be transferred to the Appellate 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, and requested exclusion of the period during which the writ petition was pending for computing the limitation period.

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, should the period of pendency of the writ petition be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing an appeal before the GSTAT? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the Appellate Tribunal is now functional and therefore, the writ petition should be transferred to it. They sought four weeks' time to file an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. Crucially, the petitioner argued for the exclusion of the period during which the writ petition was pending before the High Court when calculating the limitation period for filing the appeal before the GSTAT. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Union of India or the State.