Balaram Halder vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Balaram Halder, 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 present 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. Additionally, the petitioner requested that the period during which the writ petition has been pending before the High Court be excluded for the purpose of computing the limitation period for filing the appeal.
Held
The Court held that since the Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and is functional, the writ petition should be transferred to the Appellate Tribunal for adjudication. The Court granted the petitioner four weeks' time to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. Furthermore, the Court directed that the period during which the writ petition has been pending before the High Court shall be excluded for computing the limitation period for filing the appeal. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition should be transferred to the Appellate Tribunal, GSTAT Kolkata, given its functional status, for adjudication of the appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. 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 Appellate Tribunal. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the Appellate Tribunal is now functional and therefore, the writ petition should be transferred to it. They also contended that the time spent litigating in the writ court should not be held against them in terms of limitation for filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. Revenue/State's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State or Revenue.
Sections Cited
Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2026 ct no. 10 Sl. 13 AGM
WPA 29142 of 2024
Balaram Halder -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. D. P. Dutta. Mr. Souvik Sen. Mr. Sumanta Ganguly. …for the petitioner.
Mrs. Manju Agarwal. Mr. Bijitesh Mukherjee. Mr. Ram Chandra Agarwal.
… For the State.
Petitioner submits that since the Appellate Tribunal has already been constituted, and is functional the instant writ petition be transferred to the Appellate Tribunal and seeks four weeks time to prefer an appeal before the GSTAT Kolkata under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017/WBGST Act, 2017. The period during which the petition has been pending be excluded for computing limitation.
With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
(Smita Das De, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.